Post in Council vote Monday to allow commercial type signs in residential n...

May 19 19:01 UTC

Dan, let's be even more clear about this.

As I said, this IS an ordinance to put up commercial TYPE signs in residential
areas.

We are not talking about garage sale signs that are 1 foot by 1 foot.  We are
talking about commercial TYPE signs that could easily be 2 feet wide or larger
by 10 feet long or larger.  These signs could easily be much larger than the
campaign signs you see every election season.  There is absolutely no
restriction on the size of the sign that can be hung under this proposed change
of the law.

Yes, the ordinance allows the city council to approve these signs on a case by
case basis.  MY POINT is that I see NO REASON the citizens of this community
should support the city council having this authority to post commercial type
signs in residential areas for any reason whatsoever.

Let me be crystal clear on this.  There has been NO public policy reason
brought forward by anyone to support this kind of signage in residential
neighborhoods.

I beg to differ concerning your analysis of the type of signage that can be
placed.  There is absolutely NO language in this proposal to prohibit the
promotion of any private business.  All the ordinance says is that the signs
promote the city itself or city events.  And guess what the law says concerning
who makes this determination?  Yup you guessed right, the city council makes
this determination

There are dozens of situations where the city has a relationship with a private
business which would easily pass this test.  I could easily imagine a massive
sign with the Target logo and their dog pictured next to a Roseville police
officer and their K-9 dog, along with the statement about Target donating money
for a police dog.  This passes the test.

Another scenario is the sponsorship of fireworks by the Star Tribune in the
past.  Well that certainly is a city event and can have the huge Star Tribune
logo all over the massive sign.  This passes the test also, and again, if
anyone questions this, the council is the one who decides what ordinances mean.

The point is that this proposal IN NO WAY PROHIBITS the promotion of any
private business like is being claimed.  This is simply not true.  I will
attach the language at the bottom of this email to prove this.

Yes it is true that the majority of the light poles in the city are owned by
other entities.  But the law you are proposing goes WELL BEYOND light poles.
It includes "standards" and "other objects" which pretty much means any object
that stands upright, even including the side of a park shelter or the backstop
fence of a baseball diamond.

The council has made this a mountain out of a molehill kind of issue because
they decided to use a sledgehammer to kill an ant.

The Roseville Visitors Association wanted to hang some banners from light poles
by Rosedale and the city council responds by changing the law to allow banners
of any size to be hung from anything the city owns, light pole or not, on every
block of the city, including residential neighborhoods.

Again, what every council member seems to be trying to avoid is a simple
question.

What is the public policy justification to allow this kind of signage in
residential neighborhoods?

Why are our elected officials trying to dodge the question?

Proposed language to be added to city law:
"Signs which are affixed to City-owned light poles, standards, and/or objects
which contain information advertising the City itself or City events, provided
the
signs have been approved by the City Council and City Public Works Director or
the Director’s designee."

John M. Kysylyczyn
K Solutions LLC, owner
3083 Victoria Street
Roseville, MN  55113
email: <email obscured>
home office: (651) 484-1384

www.ksolutionsllc.com
Mayor of Roseville, MN  2000-2004