My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2009_0615
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2009
>
CC_Minutes_2009_0615
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/6/2009 2:07:34 PM
Creation date
7/6/2009 2:07:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/15/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, June 15, 2009 <br />Page 13 <br />Roe moved, Klausing seconded, directing staff to proceed with issuance of a <br />Ramsey Court Citation to the property owner at 2992 Victoria Street to ensure <br />abatement of public nuisance violations, as detailed in the Request for Council <br />Action dated June 15, 2009. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in opposition to the motion; opining that the City <br />Council should ensure parallel enforcement for commercial properties; and asked <br />that her fellow Councilmembers consider such action. <br />Councilmember Roe opined that the City had a confirmed history of enforcing <br />code violations for commercial, as well as residential, properties. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Johnson; Roe; and Klausing. <br />Nays: Ihlan. <br />Motion carried. <br />d. Approve Request to issue a Ramsey County Court Citation for Unresolved <br />Violations of City Code at 2174 Snelling Avenue <br />Permit Coordinator Don Munson reviewed the request to issue a Ramsey County <br />Court Citation for unresolved violations of City Code at 2174 Snelling Avenue, as <br />detailed in the staff report dated June 15, 2009; providing an update on the prop- <br />erty as of today; with code violations related to a placement of an inoperable and <br />severely damaged vehicle in front of the law offices of Mr. Todd Young, directly <br />under his advertising sign. Mr. Munson advised that Mr. Young claims that the <br />damaged vehicle is evidence and refuses to move it, with the client having died in <br />the vehicle and the insurance company no longer interested in storing the vehicle. <br />Mr. Munson advised that staff had received a number of complaints; and had <br />sought advise of the of the City's Attorney, who had recommended that the City <br />not impound the vehicle, but require that Mr. Young remove it. <br />Mr. Young <br />Mr. Young provided a history of the vehicle and the death of the owner; assured <br />the City Council that he was not using it for advertising; and offered to provide <br />the date of birth and death of the vehicle owner. Mr. Young advised that he was <br />unaware of any complaints and had personally sought information from adjoining <br />businesses as to whether they had complained; advising that they had denied fil- <br />ing any complaints. Mr. Young alleged that if someone was making complaint, <br />they should tell him, rather than remaining nameless and faceless. <br />Mayor Klausing advised Mr. Young that the issue was not whether anyone had <br />complained, but based on the damaged vehicle being in direct violation of City <br />Code. Mayor Klausing sought Mr. Young's logic, or whether he was making a <br />statement, or implying that the City was interfering with his First Amendment <br />rights. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.