Laserfiche WebLink
i • ' <br /> I ,a . Yrank Bennett I <br /> - _`t ' <br /> FROM Lloyd E. lleaning ���� �� ,, <br /> DATE Nav�ber 17, 1975 � - - � <br /> sue�ccr AdVlLtlelIIg SigII oII City S1dBVAlk - cirr oF evencrr. eveaerr. wasNir+eron �a� - <br /> 1500 Hewitt <br /> I a� in receipt of your memo of November 17. 1975, and apologise for any , <br /> I misunderatandinge. Hovaver, it is inwnceivable to me tbat you could vrite ' <br /> such a letter ia light of ehe recant "eign" espnrieace wlth RICABDO's. ' <br /> ITo aat the record etraight, ve turaed dovn thm applicaat's reyuea[ foz a <br /> Iporbble advertieing aign at 1508 Hewitt. Hovever. when ha ineiated that I <br /> I hn vanted to go to City C.ouncil, ve elected to take it to thn Couacil I <br /> ourselvne rathar than "inviting" him to contact a Council�an for aaother <br /> !I BICARDO's type incident. You'll recall on RICARDO's eign. i6e appeal I <br /> ca�e directly to Council and vhan ehe etaff was unprepared to make a � <br /> i atrnng reca�endation againet it� the Cauncil approved the requeat. � <br /> I <br /> � It appears to us. and I caa't underetand why it vould be "embarrassing" to <br /> City Council, it ie far mre efficient to take thasa itme to Couacil <br /> vith full backgcound and ezplanstion than to eit �ri.th �our he�d in the <br /> wnd and let Couacil react to eome emotiooal appeal from a citizen. The � <br /> latter approach ie far more lilcely to reault in (to quote yout samo) <br /> "placing the Council ln a poai[ioa of. perhapa inadvertantly, violating j <br /> nna of their ovu ordinances." <br /> LIDI:i� � <br /> cc: George Eaet.mn•i <br /> i I <br /> i <br /> I <br /> I <br /> � <br /> � <br /> i , <br /> I I <br /> I I� <br /> i � <br /> � <br />