Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Cauncil <br />A~ril ].l~ 9 1982 <br />Junk (Cont.) Nrs. Scalze r,ommented that the City ha.s to be fair to the person whose <br /> property is devalued becau se of the junkyard next door. <br /> MrA Hanson commented that he felt an effort should be first made £or <br />Naxdini pointed out <br />M <br /> a personal <br />e <br />t th contact before <br />eople who <br />are rs. <br />a letter is sent. <br />work all day and it wi7.1 not be possible <br /> er <br />tha <br />to contact p <br />them. Nardini felt a policy shou:l.d be set o£ a.ttempting <br /> to contact persona].ly and if not possibl.e a friendly letter should be <br /> sent, <br /> Scalze commented that ~he voted bo make Mr. Locke fu].l.»time ~aith <br />Mrs <br /> . <br />the thought that he would be handling things of this nature. <br />Mr. ~'orsberg stated that the Cowicil cannot require people to 1'ave theix <br />way. <br />Nlrs. Scal.ze stated that the City has an ordinance and ordinances are <br />to be £ollowed. <br />Mrs. Nardini declaxed that Mr. Locke would attempt a personal contact <br />~d i£ not possible would send a letter. Mrs. Scalze stated that a <br />complaint would not be necessary, <br />Nir, Fahey asked if the City would need a complaining witness in order <br />to prosecute someone. Fahey stated that if so he tended to agree that <br />the City shoul.d wait for a complaint except for the obvious junkyards, <br />The Attorney stated that the City woul.d need a complaining wa.tness <br />in order to en£orce the ordinance, The Building Inspector or an <br />employee of the CSty could be that witness, but it is more effective <br />i£ a neighbor is the complaining witness. <br />Fahey fe7,t the matter should be handled on a complaintbasa.s except £or <br />the obvious problem~> Mx, Hanson agreed, <br />F'ahey also gelt an. i.nformal personal contact should be made initially, <br />Amendirzg Mr. Glanzer reported that he has received model ordinances dealing <br />y. Glanzer felt <br />withixi the Cit <br />Sewer , <br />with the operation of septic pumpers <br />mouth~s ordinance was very thorough. <br />f Yl <br />it <br />Ordinance y <br />y o <br />that the C <br />enda <br />A Mro Glanzer reported that the thi <br />uire a permit to operatef <br />e <br />d <br />g <br />Item Nos 1Lt q <br />r <br />ers an <br />the City will license septic pump <br />t to allow them to diunp in the City'S <br /> in the City and whether or no <br />zer reported that to date the Ca.ty has not <br />G <br /> lan <br />sewer system, Mr< <br />5t+ kaul has such a site available to <br />ing <br />dum <br />f <br /> . <br />p <br />or <br />had a request <br /> the pumpers. <br /> Glanzer felt the City should issue ].icensesand e~~-re dumping <br />Mr <br /> , <br />the City would have some control, Also if the pump <br />uld requ3re a license from Metro <br />h <br /> o <br />into the Czty's system' the City s <br /> Seweac. <br /> Yage -16- <br />