My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/18/1994 Meeting Minutes
DOcument-Host
>
Mayfield Village
>
Meeting Minutes
>
1994
>
07/18/1994 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2019 9:12:12 AM
Creation date
7/18/2018 8:54:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Legislation-Meeting Minutes
Document Type
Meeting Minutes
Date
7/18/1994
Year
1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
. . ' 4 VI??A', <br />207 <br /> <br />Co <br />M <br />Co <br />? <br />z <br />G <br /> <br /> <br />Regular Council Meeting <br />7/18/94 <br />Page Thirteen <br />been cases all over the country that have been challenging other cities who make it <br />illegal for political signs in the first place. This goes, in his opinion, the opposite <br />direction. Are we saying that only those that can afford $3 a sign and $100 deposit be <br />allowed to run for office, if they want to put up political signs? Mr. Fixler said in view <br />of the fact that other communities around do not impose these fees, he does not see why <br />Mayfield Village should have those fees and that is why he is opposed to it. <br />Mr. Samac said the permit fee will be changed from $1.50 to $3.00. The deposit for <br />assured compliance with the ordinance is placed at $100 to give the potential candidate <br />or his workers to comply with the ordinance and not for the sake of $1.50 say I don't <br />care about the money, I will put the signs anywhere. Mr. Samac said the Ordinance <br />Review Committee along with himself felt that the administrative time and cost to write <br />up a permit for any type of sign far exceeds $1.50. We are probably still losing money at <br />$3, but we aren't in the business to make money. Mr. Samac said they just felt it was not <br />unreasonable. As long as they comply with the ordinance, the $100 is totally <br />refundable. <br />Mrs. Cinco asked the number of sign permits that are issued in a normal month. <br />Mr. Samac said it depends on the time of year. In the summertime, there are perhaps <br />several a week. He said recent Supreme Court rulings really have everybody up in the <br />air because nobody seems to have a real good handle on what you can or can't do. <br />Mr. Fixler said we have already changed the time frame on a political sign from 90 days <br />to 60 days. Since, as Mr. Samac just indicated, the Supreme Court decisions are kind of <br />up in the air--why change the fees now? He thinks now is not an appropriate time (to <br />change it) and that is why he made the motion to table it. <br />Mrs. Cinco said it was brought to' their attention because of paper handling and asked <br />that he refer to Mr. Diemert's opinion on that. <br />A resident in the audience asked why this is an emergency resolution. <br />Mrs. Cinco said it is not an emergency resolution. This is the second reading; we will <br />have the third reading in August. <br />The resident referred to the title of the ordinance which reads "an emergency <br />ordinance..."
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.