Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves UDO amendment allowing digital advertising on city property signs after heated debate
Summary
On a 6-4 vote, Aurora City Council approved final reading of Ordinance 2025-37 to amend the Unified Development Ordinance to permit digital signage on city property signs and allow off-premise advertising; opponents warned of visual blight and safety concerns.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Aurora City Council on April 7 approved final reading of Ordinance 2025-37, an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that would permit digital signage on city property signs and allow off-premise advertising. The ordinance passed by a 6-4 vote.
The planning commission recommended approval of the ordinance on Feb. 26, and the council had considered the measure in study session in March. During discussion on final reading, several council members expressed opposition on aesthetic and safety grounds. One council member told colleagues the measure risked becoming a "foot in the door" for billboard-style signage. Councilmember Bergen said she had voted no at the March study session and again said she opposed the ordinance on the final vote.
Councilmember Jurinski moved approval of the ordinance; Councilmember Hancock seconded the motion. After limited additional comment, the city clerk recorded the final tally as six yes votes and four no votes, with Councilmembers Bergen, Coombs, Medina and Murillo voting no.
Staff noted the ordinance had been through the planning commission and earlier council review. The ordinance amends sections of the UDO related to signs to add provisions (as cited in ordinance 2025-37) permitting digital display on city property signs and clarifying standards for off-premise advertising; the ordinance text, as presented at second reading, was not further amended at the meeting.
The council adopted the measure despite the objections; opponents said the change represents a significant policy shift in how city property may be used for advertising and warned of visual blight and potential safety concerns from digital signage.

