07-13-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT 2 with in that manner; option of requesting the court to bring a civil actions (probably not 45 this situation but best when there could be an issue of value of property later); and there is 46 the option of abatement by the City. Mr. Squires noted the internal hearing process 47 included in the abatement option. The council would receive a recommendation from a 48 hearing officer that they choose. An abatement process administered by staff would most 49 likely have a quicker action timeline and outcome. Mayor Rafferty suggested there is a 50 situation here, the council is aware of the problem and staff is being asked to solve the 51 problem. He would like to see information coming to the council. Regarding the hearing 52 officer process, Mr. Squires suggested that probably more than not, it isn’t an option in 53 other cities. The code allows for decisions to be made by the council and that in itself is 54 process where people can be heard. 55 56 The council discussed if this is a typical issue that staff deals with and how long this 57 situation has lasted. Staff discussed that these can be perpetual problems whereby things 58 are cleared up and then issues reappear very quickly. 59 60 Councilmember Lyden remarked that he is focusing on the language in Chapter 903 and 61 some of its definition is subjective, especially when making a determination of a threat to 62 health and safety. City Attorney Squires said that is a valid question and it is important to 63 have a balanced view in consideration of the situation and also how it impacts others, and 64 that’s why it’s a decision left to the council. The mayor noted that neighbors can be 65 impacted and the City sees this. Councilmember Stoesz asked if the City is allowed to 66 use it’s website to keep people updated on a problem property such as this, to provide 67 information for concerned residents. Community Development Director Grochala 68 remarked that complaint data is basically not public; he feels like the publicity element 69 could be seen as shaming. 70 71 Mr. Grochala noted that most of these situations go back to the City’s regulations, be it 72 zoning, environmental, etc. He again noted that the court has indicated they will deal 73 with this in July. Mayor Rafferty remarked that the court is typically not going to act 74 severely against the property owner and so it tends to stretch out the process. 75 76 The council discussed the current status of the matter in court. Councilmember Ruhland 77 suggested he likes the idea of having something in place for the City to get action. 78 79 City Attorney Squires offered to prepare information for the council on what other cities 80 do in the area of administrative enforcement. It was clarified that the City’s legal costs 81 could be assessed if they involve dealing with a specific case but not discussing the code in 82 general. 83 84 Mayor Rafferty asked Attorney Squires for an update on the St. Clair Estates matter. Mr. 85 Squires explained that the developer was not in compliance with the City’s requirements 86 and therefore work was ordered by the City and would be funded by the developer’s letter 87 of credit. Mr. Squires said he wouldn’t wish to discuss the details of the work. The 88 process is working itself out but in the meantime the developer has expressed his 89