Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday, March 9,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> Johnson asked whether that is even if it is referencing an obvious fact: if something is legal, a resident <br /> does not have to come to the City. <br /> Barnhart reiterated he would like to discuss the matter with the City Attorney. <br /> Mr. Erickson stated it is clear to him that I AG under the Fire Code includes legal and illegal fireworks. <br /> Johnson asked if the City Council's understanding was correct: Mr. Erickson's concern is that there <br /> should be an obvious exclusion to legal fireworks so people know they do not have to get a permit. <br /> Mr. Erickson said that was a large part of it. He said if someone wants to buy their children sparklers, <br /> they should not have to get a permit. <br /> Walsh asked Monge if he had an opinion on the matter. <br /> Monge stated he knows what the State statute says and he knows what is defined as legal and what <br /> are not defined as fireworks. He does not have access to the State Fire Code. <br /> Walsh said he was looking for a quick opinion or if it should be funneled to Mattick for his input. <br /> Barnhart quoted the definition from the Fire Code-- "containing restricted amounts of pyrotechnic <br /> composition" -- and indicated the "restricted amounts" language is important because that is where <br /> you get to the lawful/unlawful fireworks. Some states allow the 1.4 small fireworks to be launched; <br /> in Minnesota,they are restricted. <br /> Crosby said he does not see the Orono PD going after people with small sparklers. He thinks the Fire <br /> Code should be followed. <br /> Walsh suggested waiting until the first week in April, when Attorney Mattick returns, to work on the <br /> language. <br /> Johnson added a regular citizen should be able to read the City's Code and be clear on what it says. <br /> Johnson moved, Seals seconded, to table LA19-000063—City Of Orono Text Amendment Related <br /> To Special Events. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. <br /> 14. LA20-000005—GORDON JAMES CONSTRUCTION O/B/O DAVID& LYNN <br /> GUTERMUTH-2665 CASCO POINT ROAD,AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES <br /> Staff presented a summary of packet information. <br /> Johnson confirmed with Staff that the house was new construction. <br /> Johnson asked if the homeowner removed existing hardcover around the lakeside shed in order to apply <br /> the hardcover in another location to make sure they were conforming. <br /> Curtis stated that was true; a sidewalk/stair system, a deck, and a fire ring that were to be removed. <br /> Page 5 of 18 <br />