City Council Closer to Curfew

On Monday, August 1, the Minden City Council approved the proposed curfew to be written into ordinance. The council approved the consent agenda after some charges were explained, including one for the cost to alter water drainage near the Malcolm house by Olsen and Associates. There were also expenses for the ongoing redesign of drainage ditches to the north for better flow.
City attorney Tom Lieske, after reviewing the applicable ordinances, explained the situation with “Smokin’ For a Reason,” the street vendor who had requested permission to park on city streets. He explained that the city had created a permit that vendors could apply for. The “Treat Truck” received such a permit when it opened business in 2008. To this point, “Smokin’ For a Reason” has not applied.
Ron Russell requested permission to bypass the Planning and Zoning Committee (and the fees pertaining thereto) in the process of getting his land rezoned agricultural. The council said this was not possible, but if the council were to initiate the process itself, they could come to some agreement on the fees paid by Russell.
It was pointed out that he has been in violation of the current ordinances for years, grazing animals on land zoned residential. But he made the argument there have been no complaints about his animals in that time. The argument was started about other land in town that is used outside of its designation. The sewer treatment plant is on agricultural land and the city impound lot is on agricultural land.
It was agreed that the council would submit the rezoning proposition to the PNZ and Russell would pay half of the advertising costs, around $175 to change his lot from residential to agricultural land.
The next item on the agenda was Municipal Code Ch. 94. Theresa Sumstine spoke on behalf of the car lot owned by her and her husband. She pointed to section 94-69, C1 and C2, number three, part A. The section specifically orders cars to be parked three feet apart, and if there are two or more rows, there must be a driveway between them. She argued that such restrictions would cost significant time and money, possibly forcing them to buy more land to spread the cars out. She also said such a driveway would make it easier for the thieves who attempt to take parts from the cars.

For more, read The Minden Courier

Leave a Reply