Laserfiche WebLink
March 28, 2023 Page 8 of 10 <br />was powered through a low voltage ethernet cable. <br />Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas explained she had a number of concerns with the fact it would <br />appear the City was monitoring this intersection. Mr. Zoerb indicated he received an email <br />from Nick Kriz stating there were concerns from the neighbors that the City was monitoring <br />the neighborhood. Mr. Zoerb reported Nick Kriz sent an email to everyone in the neighborhood <br />stating the camera was privately installed and not City owned. <br />Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas anticipated not every neighbor was aware of the fact this camera was <br />privately owned. She discussed how a precedent could be set if this camera were allowed to <br />remain in place on City right of way. She questioned what would happen if hate groups wanted <br />to install signs on street signs after the City allowed Mr. Zoerb’s camera to remain in place. <br />Mr. Zoerb believed that worrying about precedent made for bad policy. He reiterated that he <br />was concerned about community security, which was a risk the Council should be willing to <br />take. <br />Mayor Niedfeldt-Thomas explained it was important for her to consider precedent because she <br />needed to consider what others may want to do. <br />Councilmember Allen explained staff’s concerns regarding liability were warranted. He stated <br />he had concerns with how allowing residents to install items on City street signs may create <br />liability issues for the City in the future. He questioned what would happen if the City’s snow <br />plow were to damage the street pole and camera. He inquired if Mr. Zoerb would expect the <br />City to replace the camera. Mr. Zoerb stated he would not expect the City to replace the <br />camera. He noted he could get a certificate of insurance indemnifying the City. <br />Councilmember Allen believed there were real liability issues in place that the Council had to <br />consider. <br />Councilmember Axberg questioned why there was a delayed response from Mr. Zoerb to the <br />City. Mr. Zoerb explained he was out of town initially in Mexico. <br />Councilmember Abdulle asked if the convenience of installing the camera on the City sign was <br />worth all this trouble. Mr. Zoerb stated the cameras were already professionally installed and <br />he did not see any reason to redo this. He recommended the City support his efforts to improve <br />security in the neighborhood. <br />Councilmember Abdulle reported the City had professionals that surveyed the neighborhood <br />and the entire City’s safety and well-being. He understood Mr. Zoerb had the right to do what <br />he wanted on his own private land, but on public right of way, Mr. Zoerb did not have the right <br />to install electronic surveillance equipment. He stated this matter has taken a great deal of staff <br />time and energy and he did not believe the camera was worth all this trouble. Mr. Zoerb <br />explained the essence of the original letter was that the City did not have a permitting process <br />to allow this. He understood there had been a lot of back and forth, but he requested the <br />Council consider allowing him to have an ad hoc permit. He wished staff was focused on other <br />things instead of trying to shut down this camera. <br />Councilmember Abdulle stated Mr. Zoerb may be okay with having private congress on City <br />street signs, however he indicated there were legitimate concerns with what this would lead to. <br />Councilmember Dunsworth questioned if Mr. Zoerb consulted with the City prior to installing <br />the cameras on the street sign. Mr. Zoerb reported he just installed the camera without <br />speaking to the City. <br />Councilmember Allen asked if the City did not approve a permit, would Mr. Zoerb be <br />removing the camera from the street sign. Mr. Zoerb indicated he would not be removing the <br />camera. He stated his security and the neighbor’s security was more important than the <br />concerns of the Council. <br />Councilmember Allen questioned why Mr. Zoerb could not reinstall the sign on a post that was <br />on his private property. Mr. Zoerb encouraged the Council to accept what was already in place. <br />he noted he would not hold the City responsible for any damage or harm that may come from <br />the camera. <br />Councilmember Allen reported there were rules in place that must be followed for the City. He <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />