My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1984/10/01
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
Agenda Packets - 1984/10/01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2025 2:21:48 PM
Creation date
3/19/2025 2:21:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/1/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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
�f ^ " ji`B <br />Mounds View City Council i'" f e lw„ .1904 <br />Regular Meeting ��� 0 , ` P <br />----------------------------------------------------------- S <br />Mayor McCarty explained he had received a <br />complaint about Mr. Quick putting his signs up too <br />early, and had passed that along to Mr. Quick. He <br />also stated he had not been formally cited at this time, <br />and if he is, he will hand the citation to Naegle, the <br />owner of the billboard in question. <br />Attorney Meyers advised that the letter that was <br />received could not be considered a formal complaint, <br />and the billboard company should be advised it is <br />in violation of the ordinance. <br />Motion/Second: Hankner/Linke to notify Naegle that <br />the sign at Highway 10 and Edgewood is in violation <br />of the City Ordinance. <br />5 ayes 0 nays <br />Motion Carried <br />Mayor McCarty stated he would like a formal <br />opinion from Attorney Meyers that this is a vio- <br />lation, and he wants a clear definition in the <br />ordinance of the difference between billboard signs <br />and electioneering signs. <br />Attorney Meyers advised that he feels the sign in <br />question is a violation of the ordinance. <br />Dennis Petrini asked Councilmember Hankner whether <br />she had written circulated a petition regarding <br />the ILS at the airport. <br />Councilmember Hankner replied she had not. Mr. <br />asked Councilmember Linke if he circulated a pet <br />Councilmember Linke veinnheered stated that he <br />not been out campaigning an -this -issue at all. <br />Mr. Petrini read a prepared statement, giving his personal <br />feelings on the position he feels certain Councilmembers <br />had taken on the airport issue. <br />Councilmember Hankner explained to Mr. Petrini that <br />she has stated it many times before, and will say it <br />again, that she does not want an intermediate airport <br />and has been an advocate; for a minor use airport. She <br />also pointed out that Mr. Petrini was nowhere around <br />during the 1983 Legislative session when the issued <br />was discussed at length, nor had he been present at <br />the many Council meetings where it has been discussed <br />until March or April of this year. <br />Councilmember Hankner explained to Mr. Petrini what she <br />feels the process has been to date on the airport. She <br />stated that while she does not want the Master Plan, there <br />are some items in it that are saleable. <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.