Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember-Elect Look suggested the issue of select enforcement be looked at. He noted <br />construction companies put out signs on the weekends "that are not removed. Existing businesses <br />have questioned why the removal of these signs .is not enforced, while they are not able to .post <br />signs this way. Also, during certain times ofthe year, such as during the Parade of Homes, there <br />are directional signs on every street corner. The City is on record saying they are willing to <br />overlook construction signs because they generate houses and development within the City, <br />whereas a sign for a liquor store may not' be something the City supports. If there is select <br />enforcement there will be those that say if the law does not apply to someone else it does not <br />apply to me. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson noted the Council discussed the issue of select enforcement and <br />consensus was that the ordinance must be applied the same to everyone. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson explained there is not staff on to enforce the removal of signs for <br />things like the Parade of Homes and garage'sales that are posted during the weekend. There was <br />previously discussion about the,fact that the Parade of Homes is marketing the City, but the City <br />Attorney advised that the ordinance must be enforced the same to everyone. Mr. Olson indicated <br />~f it is directed by Council, staff will be added on the weekends to enforce the sign ordinance. <br />Enforcement of the ordinance has not been the highest priority, and overtime has never been <br />expended for enforcement. <br /> <br />Chairperson E1vig noted the sign ordinance has been discussed at length. The issue before the <br />Committee is not the ordinance, but whether to impose a fee for violations. <br /> <br />The Committee discussed the proposed fees included in the draft ordinance and enforcement of <br />the fees. The following suggestions were made: , <br />· Likely need for an internal appeal process 'for people that state they did not violate the <br />ordinance because the sign was moved. <br />· Need for consistency in enforcement. <br />· Copy of the ordinance or information on where to obtain information about the 6rdinance <br />included with written notice of a violation. <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig questioned the cost of collecting the proposed fees. He asked if staff has <br />information on the amount of notifications that have been mailed. <br /> <br />Public Works Supervisor Reimer replied notification has been by phone calls to this point. <br /> <br />The Committee discussed the possibility of the ordinance penalties including notification that <br />violations could result in being liable up to a certain dollar amount, such as $300. <br /> <br />CounciImember Jeffrey stressed that a fee schedule should be included so no one has the doubt <br />that one individual might be charged more than another. <br /> <br />The Committee discussed the following penalty structure: <br />· 151 violation a phone call <br /> <br />Public Works Committee / November 21,2006 <br />Page 5 or8 <br />