1991-10-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 1 1 Council Meeting Minutes October 22, 1991 Page 4 Council Business. continued The City is not required to advertise for bids for this service, however, bids from other vendors were solicited. E-Z Recycling's quote was found to be the most favorable and their past performance has been excel/ent. Motion by Gunderman, seconded by Larson, to APPROVE THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN RAMSEY COUNTY AND THE CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON AND APPROVE THE RECYCLING CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON AND E~Z RECYCLING. 5 Ayes ~ 0 Nayes, Motion Carried. Council Business 1992 Recycling Agreement Report 91-227 Fridgen said Score is the State funding grant for solid waste abatement Score Funding activity administered through the County. The grant application is the first Grant step in receiving Score funding for the City's 1992 recycling program. Report 91-227 Motion by Rebelein, seconded by Williams, to APPROVE THE 1992 SCORE FUNDING GRANT APPLICATION FOR RAMSEY COUNTY. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried. City Planner Erny Mattila presented an amendment to the New Brighton Sign Ordinance to allow for non~commercial opinion signs. Since the October 8 meeting, efforts were made to arrange neighborhood mediation. Dispute Resolution Center contacted Deanna Brayton and Lynda MacDonald to arrange a session, however, Ms. Brayton declined. Both women feel mediation could occur in the future, but not at this time. The Police received a complaint from Ms. Brayton regarding a beheaded rabbit on her lawn and a harassing phone call from Ms. MacDonald. Mr. MacDonald reported a harassing phone call from Ms. Brayton. In LeFevere's opinion, the current ordinance is unconstitutional, unenforceable and exposes the City to liability. He proposes the following to satisfy constitutional requirements: a new entitlement to allow for signs devoted to free speech, subject to size and setback limitations; allow additional signs during campaign periods devoted to candidate issues and public opinion, subject to number and setback limitations; and allow commercial property and billboards devoted to commercial and free speech. The current ordinance gives preference to commercial and campaign signs, and to impose a time limitation on non-commercial opinion signs would require drastic changes in sign regulations. Council is in the difficult position of balancing two legitimate, but opposing public interests. On one hand is freedom of speech which means unlimited signage, and on the other hand is the maintaining of traditional neighborhood values. Benke said the issue is not whether the ordinance should be changed, but how can it be amended to provide for constitutional requirements. Sign Ordinance Amendment Report 91-228