Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 14, 2015 <br />6:30 o'clock p.m. <br />APPROVAL OF AGENDA (continued) <br />McMillan stated if this is going to be included on the City Council agenda, she would like it to be more <br />global so Staff can provide an update and the Council can determine how much City money should be <br />spent pursuing these violations. McMillan noted the City Council has never before singled out one <br />property owner and had a public vote on it and that she personally does not want to go down that path. <br />Walsh stated in his view they are not singling out anybody but that the City Council had a specific closed <br />session and that the Council is not allowed to vote during a closed session. Walsh stated there should be a <br />vote on it and that it would be a follow-up to a specific closed session. <br />McMillan stated part of the reason to have a closed session is to discuss strategy and that in her view <br />having an up or down vote does not do any good for the City's strategy. McMillan stated not much will <br />be gained by going after a single property owner. <br />Walsh stated this is one that is on the table and needs to be put to rest. Walsh stated if the Mayor is afraid <br />to vote on it, that tells him something. <br />McMillan stated she is not afraid to vote on it but that she is concerned about procedure and how the City <br />has dealt with code violations in the past. Generally code violations are handled at the Staff level and that <br />she respects that process. McMillan noted there are intentional and unintentional code violations that <br />occur and Staff works with the property owners and does a good job of explaining the violation. <br />McMillan stated in her view it is a very delicate matter and that it is not a simple up or down vote. <br />Walsh stated philosophically the violations should all be taken care of when the City Council discusses <br />things in closed session. <br />McMillan stated at times closed sessions are to discuss strategy and not always to come to a vote. <br />McMillan noted there is also a cost to going after every code violation in the City and that the City <br />Council needs to have a broader discussion on policy and how to go about pursuing the violations, which <br />is a bigger discussion than focusing on one specific property owner. <br />Walsh stated philosophically the City Council needs to come to a conclusion on the one property owner <br />and that there should be an up or down vote on it. <br />Printup asked whether Council Member Walsh would be open to discussing the specific item that was <br />discussed in closed session as well as the violations city-wide. <br />Walsh stated they could be two separate items. <br />Printup stated he would like to have it in black and white on the City Council's agenda. <br />McMillan stated the city-wide violations will not be able to be discussed tonight. <br />Mattick stated the City Council needs to vote on the motion and then the Council could add a separate <br />item to tonight's agenda or a future agenda to discuss it further or the motion can be withdrawn. <br />Page 3 of 44 <br />