Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, April 13, 2020 <br />6:03 o'clock p.m. <br />Mr. Anderson agreed with Walsh, noting the language is clear <br />Crosby suggested the Dock Site License Agreement should have identified the details of the LMCD rules <br />regarding the number effect. <br />Mr. Anderson stated the City did it the right way because they said it was per LMCD rules. <br />Johnson said the City is referencing the watershed code or the fire code, noting they have authority at the <br />water. The City needs to do their part and they have some authority as far as some "dock police" and <br />asked what they are policing. He assumed it would be what is on the application. <br />Walsh asked Mattick if granting a license gives someone a form of ownership, or how that is portrayed. <br />Mattick said he would view it more as permission to be on the property. He is not sure he would <br />characterize a license as an ownership interest. He does not know how the LMCD would view that in <br />terms of the number of boats. He indicated he would prefer the license language to refer to the LMCD <br />regulations without a level of specificity in case they change, because then the applicant is still subject to <br />the rules. <br />Council members agreed that Mattick made a good point. <br />Walsh stated as long as the Council has it specified, the City can approve the license, probably with the <br />caveat that only 1 boat can be there or they are in violation of the LMCD rules, unless permission is <br />received from the LMCD. <br />Crosby indicated that the applicants need that information to be communicated, in case they are not at the <br />online meeting. <br />Mr. Anderson stated the applicant's name is Jon Eiss. <br />After Council members noted Jon Eiss was not listed as an attendee, Barnhart stated he could <br />communicate the 1-dock limit and that they should consult with the LMCD to make sure they comply <br />with the requirements. <br />Council members agreed that Barnhart should do so. <br />Johnson moved, Crosby seconded, to approve the Dock License for Dock Site A, correcting it to be <br />1 boat, and that the dimensions of the dock and setback should be included in the drawing. <br />Johnson noted the City did not need a survey drawing at this point for this purpose, but the applicant <br />could improve the drawing by including the dimensions of the setback and the overall dock length. <br />VOTE: Ayes 5 (Johnson, Crosby, Printup, Seals, Walsh), Nays 0. <br />Page 5 of 25 <br />