Laserfiche WebLink
JEROME P. GILLIGAN <br /> (612)340-2962 <br /> Fax(612)340-2643 <br /> gilligan.jerome®dorseylaw.com <br /> January 9, 2003 <br /> Mr. Michael Morrison <br /> City Manager <br /> City of St. Anthony <br /> 3301 Silver Lake Road N.E. <br /> St. Anthony, MN 55418-1603 <br /> Re: Regulation of Opinion Sign on Residential Property <br /> Dear Mike: <br /> The City of St. Anthony's sign ordinance (Chapter 14 of the City Code) does not <br /> permit lawn signs to be located on residential property stating an opinion on issues, <br /> except to the extent such sign qualifies as a political sign under the sign ordinance which <br /> are permitted to be located on lawns during election season. <br /> In Goward v. City of Minneapolis, 456 N.W.2d 460 (Minn. App. 1990), the <br /> Minnesota Court of Appeals held that a Minneapolis ordinance imposing a near total ban <br /> on noncommercial lawn signs in residential zones was unconstitutional since it violates <br /> the first amendment. The Court went on to say that this ruling does not prevent the city <br /> from enacting reasonable ordinances limiting sign dimensions, establishing setback <br /> requirements, and so forth. <br /> In Branton v. City of New Brighton, 519 N.W.2d 243 (Minn. App. 1994), the <br /> Minnesota Court of Appeals held that a New Brighton ordinance which allowed residents <br /> to post on their property one noncommercial opinion sign year around and additional, <br /> campaign and/or noncommercial opinion signs during the election season up to one per <br /> ballot issue and candidate, does not violate the first amendment, and the Court upheld the <br /> ordinance. The Court stated the ordinance balanced the City's inherent substantial <br />