Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,July 20,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> lot of things. He commented that, as a City,they have a very broad authority to do lots of things if there <br /> are problems. He stated at times the prosecuting attorney has said a code has not been written well enough <br /> that they can prosecute someone and that the Council needs to fix it.As a small community, sometimes it <br /> takes a long time to run into an issue, as opposed to larger communities. <br /> Gettman clarified that the Council is not looking to put teeth to this,because absent the teeth, it is just <br /> repeating language and taking up space. <br /> Mayor Walsh said he does not know if he said that. He is trying to say the City Council is trying to not <br /> add or duplicate language. They want to make sure that if it is a good rule, it needs to be followed or the <br /> City will prosecute you. It also has to be prosecutable. If it cannot be enforced,there is no point in having <br /> it in the code. He is not saying this language is or is not; it is a very good conversation to have with no <br /> right or wrong answer. <br /> Ressler stated that having a position that would have more grip to it than the other governing authorities <br /> in the matters that would be relevant to this proposed text becomes an expense and Staff has to be <br /> employed or found to fight the argument. There are not many situations that would apply to this. He <br /> personally knows how many contractors have done wrongful work and have maintained their license, <br /> much to his surprise. It becomes a perspective that someone licensed to do their job in the state is not <br /> allowed to do their job, and now a can of worms of legal arguments are opened up. He sees both sides of <br /> the situation. The merits are there but it does not appear as though it is something communities of <br /> Orono's scale have in their language, according to the City Attorney's comments. Gettman's comments <br /> have been well-heard and there could be discussion when it goes beyond the Planning Commission. <br /> Libby said he is glad the Chair heard and recognized the very valid point the Mayor brought up,which is <br /> that there is a judicial system that has different tiers, and depending on the potential of being able to <br /> prosecute a violation,there needs to be something that is enforceable. He thinks the current language does <br /> not really guide the Planning Commission because there are other authorities from the City Council and <br /> beyond that are going to take care of this. He agrees with the City Attorney. In the big picture of things, <br /> Barnhart is trying to move the Planning Commission to a vote, and he tends to feel that particular element <br /> would do well being removed. <br /> Ressler noted the biggest thing that struck him is the simplification. They discussed in a previous meeting <br /> species of trees and whether everyone would become arborists and learn what was acceptable about trees <br /> or whether the Planning Commission would defer to a governing authority that has the ability to amend <br /> that at will when they find out a silver maple causes a brain-eating amoeba. The Planning Commissioners <br /> do not have to be experts because they can defer to another expert who only focuses on those things. <br /> Libby stated Gettman's point is valid because he is thinking as a good public servant and advocating for <br /> consumers and trying to do something that is protective. He also tends to lean more heavily towards legal <br /> counsel advice on the fact the language does not guide them enough. It also does not serve the public well <br /> enough to keep it in the body of the document. <br /> Kirchner commented that the Mayor mentioned a violation is in the eye of the beholder and just because <br /> the Planning Commission believes someone has violated, until a court of law affirms that with a guilty <br /> conviction or a judgement against someone, it is not affirmed. He has testified in cases that are 4'/2 years <br /> old, and trying to remember who he pulled out of a car at 2:00 in the morning is difficult. The cases take a <br /> while to work themselves out, and the City would be behind and open itself up to civil litigation if the <br /> Page 9 of 19 <br />