My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-05-22 Regular
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2006
>
2006-05-22 Regular
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2009 4:03:19 PM
Creation date
6/19/2006 12:18:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
5/22/2006
SESSIONNUM
1999
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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 meeting <br />May 22, 2006 <br /> <br />AGENDA ITEM #6 — Public Hearing on Residential Political Signs <br /> <br />The Public Hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. <br /> <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS: <br />Elsie Glickert, 6712 Etzel <br />Ms. Glickert was against the displaying of political signs because of the resulting visual <br />pollution of signs. She wanted reduction of sign size and against extended time. <br /> <br />Ralph Bowser, 8050 Teasdale Ave <br />Mr. Bowser should not extend time limitation of political signs. He felt with all the variety <br />of elections, locally and nationally, there would be political signs displayed at all times. <br /> <br />Suzanne Schoomer, 7 Princeton <br />Ms. Schoomer was against increase in sign size or time duration. <br /> <br />Deb Carlin, 7132 Washington <br />Ms. Carlin read an e-mail she sent to Council and Mayor speaking against the new sign <br />bill. <br /> <br />Gerry Greiman, 7042 Westmoreland Dr <br />Mr. Greiman, as University City resident and an attorney, he explained the meaning of the <br />legal statute of political signs according to the First Amendment of the US Constitution. <br />He explained that he was the attorney who represented and won the case of Mary Gileo <br />vs Ladue in allowing her to display a political sign in the city.Mr. Greiman said that court <br />cases protected political freedom of speech in political signs according to the U.S. <br />Constitution. <br /> <br />Susan Carlson, 7042 Westmoreland <br />Ms. Carlson, as a University City resident and an attorney, spoke on the <br />unconstitutionality of University City’s present sign ordinance. She said that federal courts <br />ruled on this issue stressing outlawing content discrimination. <br /> <br />Myrna Fichtenbaum, 18647 Kingsbury Blvd. <br />Ms. Fichtenbaum concurred with the last two speakers and would like to use her time <br />later in the meeting. <br /> <br />Wayne Munkel, 7543 Gannon <br />Mr. Munkel stated that University City’s ordinances were drafted by the city attorney. <br /> <br />Arlene Zarembka, 7500 Trenton Ave <br />Ms. Zarembka, as a lawyer, stated that all political, construction and real estate signs <br />need to abide by equal requirements or place restrictions. <br /> <br />Paul Schoomer, 7 Princeton Pl <br />Mr. Schoomer was in favor of the present sign ordinance. He said that this be referred to <br />the Plan Commission for changes. <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.