09-28-09-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—September 28, 2009 16 7B. Motion to Approve Ordinance 2009-011 and Ordinance 2009-012 (continued) City Attorney Filla stated that there was a hearing and they would make a recommendation to the City. Councilmember Grant asked how this Ordinance would compare to other cities. City Planner Beekman stated that it is similar to other cities. Mayor Harpstead asked what the number of violations other cities were using before a business lost their license. City Planner Beekman stated that the number of violations was three to five violations. Mayor Harpstead stated that after the third violations the City could look into revocation of license. He clarified that the third violation would be a fine and a loss of license. Councilmember McClung clarified that once a license has been revoked the business has an opportunity to appeal the decision. City Planner Beekman clarified that the Council was interested in changing the number of violations before a license was revoked from five in 36 months to three in 48 months. Councilmember Holmes asked if the City had to revoke a license after three violations. City Attorney Filla stated that a hearing was required to establish the facts whether or not there has been a violation of the City's Regulations. The Council could change the wording from "shall be revoked" to "may be revoked." It is important that the City send the right message to business owners to police their own businesses. Councilmember McClung stated that under the License Clearance Statute the Minnesota Department of Revenue can take action for a business that does not pay their taxes and requests that the license be revoked. He stated that the Ordinance states "shall be revoked". He asked if there was a problem with the Ordinance and what the License Clearance Statute.