Pedernales Electric Cooperative

[A-R]

Forgot to pay my electric bill online this month

So drove by the local PEC offices (on RR620 just west of Lakeline Mall for those in the North Austin/Cedar Park area) to drop off payment in person (due tomorrow).

And THIS confront me as I approach the door



As you can see from relational size comparison in next photo, sign and lettering aren't nearly big enough ...



... but I wasn't risking it just to pay my bill on time. I did get a chuckle out of the part about charging me with criminal trespass under 30.05 in the superfluous upper portion of the sign.

Later drove by their other location on FM 1431 just west of Lakeline Blvd. and thankfully that location has a drive-thru payment window (like a bank). So I made my payment there, but also got out of the truck to snap these pics.





What chaps my hide is that - unlike larger cities (and even Round Rock) - I have NO CHOICE in my electric utility provider (it's PEC or pouring gas into a generator - which I doubt my HOA would approve). Similar to a government institution, I am required to do business with these folks regardless of how much I may despise their decisions. Unlike the gubmint, however, they can and apparently do post 30.06 signs (valid or not) and intend to enforce them (leading to at least a major headache and lost time/police car ride if I'm caught).

Anyway, posting so others are aware (have also submitted to Russell over at texas3006.com). Guess I'll have to be sure to pay my bill on time online from now on.

[fickman]

I'm in a Coop here in far north Fort Worth. . . can't wait to get deregulated. I don't think I've been to the building in seven years, though.

[fickman]

(Please enter those locations at http://texas3006.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

[A-R]

(Please enter those locations at http://texas3006.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Anyway, posting so others are aware (have also submitted to Russell over at texas3006.com). Guess I'll have to be sure to pay my bill on time online from now on.

[srothstein]

BTW, the 30.05 warning does not apply to a CHL, as we all know, but it is valid for everyone else who is carrying except peace officers. For example, a security guard, a soldier, or a traveler who stopped by for directions could be charged under the 30.05 notice.

[apostate]

BTW, the 30.05 warning does not apply to a CHL, as we all know, but it is valid for everyone else who is carrying except peace officers. For example, a security guard, a soldier, or a traveler who stopped by for directions could be charged under the 30.05 notice.

It also appears valid for "concealed or unconcealed" rifles and shotguns, even if carried by a CHL.

[kjolly]

Makes you wonder what they are scared of? Honest citizens who have elected to be able to defend themselves in today's harsher society are not a danger.

[Flatland2D]

I work at a PEC office. Those signs are at every office location on just about every door. I was verbally told on my first day of work that I can't carry, but that doesn't prevent our CHL having members from carrying.

Out of curiosity, what does this do to existing "no guns" policies (edit: this is in regards to the new parking lot law in effect today)? Since the law reads that a public or private employer may not prohibit... does that make the old policy illegal? To me, this is different than a 30.06 sign, where a wrong sign isn't illegal, it's just not enforceable. But here, there law specifically instructs an employer to NOT do something that they are doing.

[stash]

AR, I also am a member of PEC and this is really disappointing to learn. For a elec. co., I always thought highly of them. Now that thought has been ruined for me. I have been a customer for over 10 years, but have never been to one of their offices. Oh well, like you, cannot do anything about it. Now thats two for me, PEC and USAA, but with USAA, I will not renew my home owners insurance.

[A-R]

BTW, the 30.05 warning does not apply to a CHL, as we all know, but it is valid for everyone else who is carrying except peace officers. For example, a security guard, a soldier, or a traveler who stopped by for directions could be charged under the 30.05 notice.

It also appears valid for "concealed or unconcealed" rifles and shotguns, even if carried by a CHL.

Good points.

[A-R]

I work at a PEC office. Those signs are at every office location on just about every door. I was verbally told on my first day of work that I can't carry, but that doesn't prevent our CHL having members from carrying.

Out of curiosity, what does this do to existing "no guns" policies (edit: this is in regards to the new parking lot law in effect today)? Since the law reads that a public or private employer may not prohibit... does that make the old policy illegal? To me, this is different than a 30.06 sign, where a wrong sign isn't illegal, it's just not enforceable. But here, there law specifically instructs an employer to NOT do something that they are doing.

My understanding is you would still be prohibited from carrying in the premises (as are all CHLees by the 30.06 sign - if valid), but the new law would allow you legally to keep your gun in YOUR vehicle (not a company vehicle) in the company parking lot regardless of company policy. Of course, the company could still fire you and just make up another reason for doing so.

[Flatland2D]

I agree, the parking lot law only gives the right to keep a handgun in a locked personal vehicle. I'm just wondering how this effects (legality) existing policies. I'd assume the parking lot aspect of the policy is just not enforceable, but was wondering if there was something more.

[The Annoyed Man]

Subject: Pedernales Electric Cooperative

BTW, the 30.05 warning does not apply to a CHL, as we all know, but it is valid for everyone else who is carrying except peace officers. For example, a security guard, a soldier, or a traveler who stopped by for directions could be charged under the 30.05 notice.

I have a question about 30.05 if you don't mind....

Since it is already against the law in the normal course of affairs for anyone except a peace officer, an armed security guard, or a CHL holder to carry a weapon in public (MPA excepted), what possible use does 30.05 still serve today? As I understand it, under 30.05:

• A peace officer may normally carry, and he knows he may still carry past the 30.05 sign (rendering the sign superfluous for LEOs).
• An armed security guard may normally carry in the performance of his duties, and he knows he may not carry otherwise unless he has a CHL, and he may not carry past this sign unless he works for the utility and this is his post to guard (rendering the sign superfluous for armed security guards).
• A soldier may NOT normally carry, unless he/she is an MP (and therefore LEO), or it is a time of martial law (in which case 30.05 may not apply); and he/she knows that they may not carry a weapon anyway unless they are LEO, CHL (which negates 30.05), or under orders to do so (rendering the sign superfluous for soldiers).
• A non-CHL traveler who stopped by for directions can carry under MPA inside their vehicle and/or between their residence and their vehicle, and their vehicle and their place of business, BUT he cannot lawfully carry between his vehicle and the utility company office; and presumably he knows this because he is neither LEO or CHL. It is not credible that a normally law abiding citizen would simply assume that it was OK to carry a gun outside his home, business, or vehicle. I'm not talking about from an RKBA perspective, but simply that no normal law-abiding citizen believes that there are no laws against carrying a gun anywhere he wants to, anytime he wants. We all know it is illegal unless certain requirements are fulfilled (rendering the sign superfluous for travelers).
• The CHL holder may normally carry, and barring the presence of a 30.06 sign, he may carry past the 30.05 sign (rendering the sign superfluous for CHLs).
• And finally, the criminal doesn't give a rip and will carry anywhere he wants to (rendering the sign meaningless to a criminal).

When I list it out like this, it appears as if 30.05 was written to keep armed security guards and criminals who don't care about the law out of the building. Obviously, the utility company in question has given this stuff some thought, or they would not have posted the 30.06 sign to specifically bar CHLs from carrying into their building.......but whom is it exactly that they thought the 30.05 sign was going to stop?

I know, I know.....By definition, none of this stuff makes any sense. But have I parsed this correctly? My back is in terrible shape today, and I confess to being medicated. It's entirely possible I've missed something.

[denwego]

TAM:

The only two plausible situations I'd add are the non-CHL traveler and the long gun one. Someone who's traveling (legitimately so, like driving from Houston to Dallas and stops off to pay his electric bill before hitting the road) doesn't need to be in his car to carry, and could carry openly or concealed, and wouldn't be carrying under the authority of a CHL and would not be bound by 30.06. It's certainly rare from the perspective of a business posting a sign, but corporate bureaucrats get paid to be anal retentive and way overthink things, so I guess they'd want to prevent it.

Then there's the long gun angle. Generally quite impractical, but as the owner of a SUB-2000 which fits in my messenger bag, I could walk right in with a concealed rifle without drawing any attention or having anyone bat a negative eye at me. If they had a 30.06 sign but no 30.05-type notification, there'd be nothing stopping me or someone else from doing that, or carrying a registered SBS, or something like that.

[apostate]

I have a question about 30.05 if you don't mind....

Since it is already against the law in the normal course of affairs for anyone except a peace officer, an armed security guard, or a CHL holder to carry a weapon in public (MPA excepted), what possible use does 30.05 still serve today? As I understand it, under 30.05:

Do you mean 30.05 generally (trespassing) or the sign at PEC specifically?

If the latter, it's generally not against the law to carry long guns in Texas (except where prohibited by 46.03) but the PEC sign would make it a violation of the trespass law to carry any firearm inside. (With some exceptions, such as 30.05(i) for peace officers.)