A Reagan Outdoor Advertising billboard in North Austin seeks billboard employees in a tight Central Texas job market. [Ken Herman/American-Statesman]
Austin American-Statesman
A proposal to loosen Austin’s longstanding restrictions on billboards returns to the City Council on Thursday for a public hearing, reviving a decades-old debate over outdoor advertising in the city.
The ordinance, sponsored by Council Member Chito Vela, would amend city code to allow certain billboards to relocate if the property beneath them is redeveloped for housing. It would also reduce the required distance between a billboard and a residence from 500 feet to 150 feet.
Article continues below this ad
The item was initially scheduled for the Jan. 22 council meeting but was pulled from the agenda two days before the vote. Since then, Vela has revised the proposal, though opponents say their concerns remain.
Austin has tightly regulated billboards for decades. Current city code prohibits billboards within 500 feet of a residential structure and largely bars the construction of new signs. In late January, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the revised relocation provisions.
Under the proposal, billboard owners could move existing signs rather than remove them outright when redevelopment or transportation projects displace them. If the city requires removal of a billboard, state law mandates that the owner be compensated.
Vela declined an interview request to discuss his proposal.
Article continues below this ad
Austin City Council Member José “Chito” Vela socializes at the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees watch party in support of the passage of Proposition Q at the Brewtorium, Nov. 4, 2025.
Sara Diggins/Austin American-Statesman
In a message sent Tuesday to the mayor and council members, Vela said the ordinance is intended to address situations in which billboards are forced off properties because of public infrastructure projects or new residential development.
“Allowing the relocation of a sign because of a transportation project reduces the money the city would have to pay to the billboard owner in any condemnation proceedings,” Vela wrote. “We have lots of transportation projects moving forward and many more on the way. I want our transportation dollars to go toward the actual project and not to pay for the cost of condemning a billboard.”
Some neighborhood advocates argue the change would weaken protections for residential areas and could depress property values.
Article continues below this ad
“I’m incredibly frustrated and disappointed that they are putting the interests of billboard companies above regular people,” said Bob Schmidt of the Cherrywood Neighborhood Association. “If you move a billboard into a neighborhood where there wasn’t one before — which is what this ordinance will allow — it’s going to ruin people’s neighborhoods.”
Austin City Hall in downtown Austin
Villalpando, Rob (CMG-Austin)/Austin American-Statesman
Margaret Lloyd, an advisory board member of Scenic Texas, said she was concerned about what she described as limited public engagement during the drafting of the ordinance, particularly given Austin’s long and contentious history with billboard regulation.
“There is nothing unfair about paying constitutionally required just compensation when the city needs land for public projects,” Lloyd wrote in a letter to the mayor and council. “Why would the city treat sign owners different from, even better than, other properties that must be condemned?”
Article continues below this ad
Reagan Outdoor Advertising, one of Austin’s largest billboard operators, expressed support for the measure.
“Austin continues to experience significant growth and infrastructure investment,” Billy Reagan, the company’s general manager, said in a statement. “As public projects advance and corridors evolve, existing signs are often impacted. The proposed relocation process is designed to responsibly address those impacts while balancing community compatibility and economic realities.”
Campaign finance reports show that nearly every current council member, except Paige Ellis and Marc Duchen, has received campaign contributions from members of the Reagan family from 2018 to 2025. Individual contributions from the family appear to range from $450 to more than $3,000.
Council members Natasha Harper-Madison, Ryan Alter, Vanessa Fuentes and José Velásquez did not respond to questions about how they plan to vote or about the contributions.
Article continues below this ad
Council Member Krista Laine said in a prepared statement that she has not made a final decision and would “evaluate every item based on its merits, community input, and what I believe is best for Austin.”
“I have received campaign contributions from a wide range of individuals and stakeholders across Austin, as is common in municipal campaigns,” she said. “I am grateful that Austin has in place campaign donation limits which help to keep policymakers unbiased.”
Council Member Mike Siegel said he opposes the ordinance.
“I did receive a Reagan donation. It will not affect my vote,” Siegel said in a statement. “This is an important question that gets at the heart of campaign finance reform and democracy.”
Article continues below this ad
Council Member Zo Qadri also said Wednesday that he plans to vote against the proposal, citing opposition from residents in his district.
“I’m guided by my constituents and making sure that I do right by folks in District 9,” Qadri said. “I’m not guided by any donation.”
Campaign records show Vela has received contributions from seven members of the Reagan family — more than any other council member. Vela did not respond to written questions about whether the donations present a conflict of interest.
Article continues below this ad
“As a regulated industry operating within the city, we frequently receive requests for support from candidates seeking public office,” Reagan, the general manager, said in a statement. “Like many local businesses, we support individuals who support reasonable policymaking and who share a commitment to helping Austin thrive in compliance with the city’s campaign finance regulations.”