04-27-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 13, 2020 6:03 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 23 of 25 Mattick stated there is a pragmatic approach and also just a strict enforcement. They are in violation of the law; but if they are not going to be in violation in 2 weeks, does the City start a court action. He asked what the City hoped to achieve, or if it was to send a message. There is a certain amount of discretion when enforcing the laws. He gave the example of not seeing a lot of tickets written for people going 59 mph in a 55. He said it sounds like in a couple of weeks the owners will be in compliance. Johnson said the property owner may be in compliance but there are question marks about the situation. Mattick noted one of the statements in the policy regarding code enforcement is to gain voluntary compliance. The City sends letters saying within 10 days property owners need to fix an issue. If in 14 days or 2-3 weeks the issue is fixed, does the City want to start a criminal action upon seeing something, or does the City want to work with the owner and figure out if they will get to compliance. If the City needs to take a stiffer swing at it, the City may want to look at opening up the policy. Johnson stated Mattick was making his point. The first question is, who gets to decide who the City discriminates against as far as which ones move on immediately and which ones the City chooses to take a blind eye to. The goal is 100% compliance and the City wants that without going to the next level. If the first level is not started, what happens if there is not compliance in a few weeks. If the Governor says construction workers are not essential, all of a sudden 2 weeks turn into 6 weeks. When a complaint comes in, the City should investigate the complaint and put the wheels in motion. If the owner complies, everyone is happy. In his opinion, it is very dangerous and an irresponsible approach to pick and choose. Walsh said about a year ago a policy was put in place regarding how to address violations. The process is, if the City receives a complaint, the City sends a letter out and the recipient has time to reply. His understanding is Staff is making a judgment call and saying in this case it will be in 2 weeks. By the time the City gives them the letter and time to comply, they have already complied. He stated he is willing to pull out the policy and revisit it if there is anything the Council should tweak on it. He agreed that the Council needs to be consistent in every case. Johnson said that is his point and there is no harm in getting the ball rolling. Barnhart noted part of the issue is limited resources. He did visit the property and noticed the property owners were well into framing the second floor. He thought it was a reasonable response to not fire up a letter and then retract it later. He does not think the City gains anything. He has other violations he is spending his time on. Printup asked if that property owner was aware they did something that they should not have done. Barnhart stated that they probably do not know that. He said he could send the property owner a letter saying they are in violation. The issue is that the violation will only happen once in the life of the building because it only applies if the house is torn down in the winter and you want to put a dock up before the house is done. Johnson said Staff does not get to decide; and for the City’s protection, the City should treat every file the same, especially code enforcement. He saw the code enforcement list, and there are not an overwhelming amount of complaints the City is dealing with. Seals agreed with Johnson. She said it is great that they will be in compliance in a few weeks, but it sends the wrong message: We know that you messed up, but we aren’t going to let you know and we are going