My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-15-18-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
10-15-18-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2024 12:09:47 AM
Creation date
11/14/2018 4:42:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—OCTOBER 15, 2018 4 <br /> Mr. Zweber summarized the feedback he received from the Council and thanked them for their <br /> time. <br /> C. Annual Permanent Sign Renewals <br /> City Clerk Hanson stated the adopted Fee Schedule includes a $25.00 fee per sign for the annual <br /> renewal of permanent signage. An average of 150 businesses are licensed/registered with the City <br /> each year, but compliance regarding this particular fee has been low. For the past six years, the <br /> following number of businesses have been in compliance regarding payment of the permanent <br /> sign renewal fee: 32 in 2018; 32 in 2017; 41 in 2016; 36 in 2015; 32 in 2014; and 42 in 2013. <br /> City Clerk Hanson stated the low compliance rate had been discussed with the City Planner, who <br /> had indicated that City Code states "The Sign Code requires that the Council set fees annually but <br /> not that the City has to charge an annual renewal fee". In other words, City Code does not include <br /> language that specifically relates to the requirement of an annual permanent sign renewal (as it <br /> does for pet licensing, City contractor licensing, business licensing, etc.). Based on current code <br /> language ambiguity and historical low compliance rates, City staff is requesting Council feedback <br /> and direction. <br /> Mayor Grant summarized if the annual program were to go away this would cost the City up to <br /> $5,000 in revenue. <br /> Councilmember McClung suggested the language within the renewal letter in bolded type to <br /> highlight the needs of the City. He stated he would like to see the City try and bring businesses <br /> into compliance in this manner versus hiring additional staff. He anticipated this was a case <br /> where the letter was being over looked by local business owners. <br /> Councilmember Holden recalled the renewals were required to address sign maintenance issues. <br /> She stated she did not want to see the program go away. She suggested a summer intern could <br /> possibly be considered to assist with compliance and enforcement issues. <br /> Councilmember Scott commented the main problem with this program was the City's <br /> enforcement or lack thereof. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she did not want to see staff spending a lot of time on this issue, <br /> but agreed with Councilmember McClung's recommendation to make changes to the renewal <br /> letter. <br /> Mayor Grant agreed with this recommendation. <br /> City Clerk Hanson suggested the Council amend City Ordinance if the sign renewal fee was <br /> required in order to provide staff with further backing on this program. <br /> The Council supported amending City Ordinance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.