Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD MARCH 14, 1994 0 <br />POLICE CHIEF REPORT - CONT. <br />DeLuca explained in the beginning, it takes more set up time. It will be possible to carry funds <br />over for use next year. <br />Hurr stated the special investigator is funded by the City and asked if his work involves children <br />in other communities or only Orono residents? <br />Chief Sullivan responded that the investigator's work deals with any crime or problem that <br />occurs in the four cities that we serve. It does not matter where the child lives if the problem <br />is presenting itself at our school. If the children are in the Orono School District, they are <br />protected equally. <br />Jabbour inquired if a contract would be entered into with the School. <br />Chief Sullivan replied he did not know if it would be a formal contract. Basically we want to <br />determine what is the anticipated cost of that officer per hour going to be and divide that into <br />$11,000 and come up with a block of time. If the School chooses a part time officer, the officer <br />would work there for those hours and if a full time officer is chosen, it would be handled similar <br />to the DARE program where the officer works his time in the school and then 4 to 5 hours as • <br />a uniform patrol officer out on the street. <br />Mayor Callahan said the Council seems to be in favor of the idea but neither the School nor <br />Police Department have thought this through. He suggested the concept be approved and asked <br />that the School and Police Department work out specific details with the City Administrator. <br />It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to accept the concept of the School Liaison <br />Officer but asks that the School and City work out a specific plan. Ayes 5, nays 0. <br />( #4) #1897 R. HUNT GREENE AND JANE E. PICCARD, 865 PARTENWOOD ROAD - <br />VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3389 <br />Mabusth explained the application involves hardcover increases to property situated within the <br />0 -75' setback area. The applicants propose a 650 s.f. garage /storage addition which will be <br />located 39' from the channel shoreline and 52' from the 929.4 elevation. An issue is the <br />overhang along the channel side. The applicants now show they will meet the 39' setback <br />required by the DNR at the channel side and a reduction from 3 1/2' overhang to a 2 1/2' <br />overhang adjacent to Maxwell Bay shoreline but at southwest corner of garage, overhang will <br />be reduced to 2'. <br />4 is <br />