My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 1976/10/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1976
>
Minutes - 1976/10/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2025 1:47:16 PM
Creation date
2/7/2011 2:24:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
10/12/1976
Description
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
October 12, 1976 Page 5 <br />Roll call vote on the <br />Councilmember <br />Councilmember <br />Councilmember <br />Councilmember <br />Mayor Pickar <br />amendment: <br />Baumgartner nay <br />Rowley nay <br />Shelquist nay <br />Hodges nay <br />aye <br />MSP Shelquist- Hodges) to amend the motion to instruct the Administrator to send an <br />advance copy of the ordinance to all City, State and Federal candidates campaign <br />offices within his capabilities and set the publication date as October 21, 1976 <br />5 ayes <br />Attorney Meyers reviewed the definition of a sign in the ordinance. Mr. Paradise <br />asked what a Naegele sign would be considered, commercial advertising or as an <br />election sign. Administrator Achen stated that the proposed ordinance limits the <br />size so that a candidate that could afford to advertise on a Naegele sign, might <br />not be allowed to. However, it could be considered legal under the commercial <br />advertising provisions of Chapter 39. <br />Jerry,Linke 2319 Knoll Drive, asked if a tree or telephone pole could be used <br />for a sign. Attorney Meyers stated that NSP and the telephone company enforce <br />their own rules on this. <br />Roll call vote on the <br />Councilmember <br />Ceuncilmemh <br />Councilmember <br />Councilmember <br />Mayor Pickar <br />amendment: <br />Baumgartner aye <br />Rowley aye <br />Shelquist aye <br />Hodges aye <br />nay <br />Mayor Pickar stated that he was in complete agreement to clarifying the ordinance, <br />but passing an amendment during the campaign may be misconstrued, so he voted nay. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner stated that if all the candidates have to comply with <br />this ordinance he does not see how it can be construed as a political move during <br />an election. <br />ORDINANCE AMENDING SNOWBIRD REGULATIONS <br />Attorney Meyers reviewed the proposed ordinance which amends snowbird regulations. <br />MS (Hodges Rowley) to adopt Resolution No. 255. <br />Motion failed <br />1 aye <br />1 nays <br />Motion Carried <br />4 ayes <br />1 nay <br />Councilmember Shelquist stated he does not understand the proposed requirements for <br />snowbirds. "Blowing snow" would appear that the grader has been by and you can park, <br />but within 48 hours blowing snow could fill the street back in and you will be in <br />violation. Section B says a warning tag must give 24 hours notice and the proposed <br />ordinance allows 4 hours. Administrator Achen explained that in Section A the <br />words "blowing snow" were inserted because they were in the Coon Rapids ordinance. <br />The prior proposal required certification that three inches has faller.. In some <br />areas the snow may blow and drift to a depth requiring plowing even though three <br />inches had not fallen. It is not intended to burden the vehicle owner but to allow <br />some latitude for snow plowing. The reason for Section B is to allow the plows to <br />go back and clean -up the streets even if no snow has fallen. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.