My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-23-05 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
02-23-05 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:45:00 PM
Creation date
6/6/2008 11:46:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTUS <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />TEBRLJARY 23, 2005 <br />Ayes (5) LaValle, Montour, Keis, Allan, Blesener. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />The City Administrator commended the Pinance'Director for the job she <br />has done in analyzing the City's water service fee and water rates. He <br />noted the ability of the City to reduce water rates for its residents in light <br />of the renegotiated rate with the City of St. Paul. The Administrator noted <br />that the sewer rates will lil<eIy have to increase. however, it is hoped that <br />with better controls on inflow and infiltration, the City will be able to <br />reduce those rates in the future. <br />BANNTRS AND LaValle expressed concern about the use of banners by some City <br />PROMOTIONAL businesses and stated thaC he thought when the ordinance was revised that <br />SI,GNAG~G these banners were intended to be used for promotions, anniversary sales, <br />specials, etc. LaValle stated that he did not think it was the intent of the <br />Council that these banners were to be i~ised to merely advertise the location <br />of a business. <br />The Council discussed this issue and whether the ordinance should be <br />revised to include banners as temporary signs requiring a permit. The <br />Planner indicated that prior to the ordinance amendment permitting <br />banners, they were considered a temporary sign that required a permiC. <br />LaValle suggested that while banners should be considered a temporary <br />sign requiring a permit, the permit fee should be less than other temporary <br />signs. <br />It was the consensus of the Council to refer this issue to the City Planner <br />and City Administrator for a recommendation. "that reconvroendation will <br />be reviewed by the Council first, with the issue then referred to the <br />Planning Commission for review and comment. <br />C~~LOS.1;D Mr. LaValle introduced the followinb resolution and moved its adoption: <br />SPSSION <br />RF„SO7, U770N NO. 200.i-2-.i N - TEMPORAR/I, Y ADJOUIUVIN(i TIIE <br />RL'GUL, f R C/TY CO UNCII, n9F.'G'T/NG AND GO1NG INTO CLOSED <br />SEb:S'ION TO DISCiI.S'.S THE DA 3:SPRING LIT/GATION <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Allan. <br />Ayes (5) LaValle, Allan, Montour, Keis, 131esener. <br />Nays (U). Resolution declared adopted. <br />ADJOURN Mr. LaValle inh~oduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.