My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-11-2016 Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
2016
>
01-11-2016 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2016 10:06:19 AM
Creation date
2/11/2016 10:05:14 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, January 11, 2016 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />19. CODE ENFORCEMENT (continued) <br />Lanphor stated it isnot an easy matter for him or the other neighbors and that nobody wants to complain <br />about what people are doing on their property. Lanphor stated that is not what is going on here and that <br />the Council is aware of the violations. <br />Walsh stated the Council owes the public a discussion on this issue, and if not, that would be a dereliction <br />of their duties. <br />Cornick asked if the City is at the point where they are ready to prosecute this homeowner and whether <br />the homeowner needs to be notified. <br />Mattick indicated the homeowner does not need to be notified but that he would like the ability to step <br />back and re-examine what exactly exists out there. <br />Cormick stated he would like a formal process to be followed rather than simply start with prosecution. <br />Walsh requested Council Member Cornick identify what steps he would like to see happen. <br />Cornick stated in his view the City should identify all the violations, draft a letter to the property owner <br />saying the City is aware of this, give him a certain time to correct the situation, and then go on to Step 2, <br />which is prosecution. Cornick stated he is not saying this property owner should be treated in a special <br />way but that the City should treat him as a general resident. <br />Mattick stated if the motion is successful, he would like to lay out what the process will be. Mattick <br />stated he needs to have a firm grasp of what is out there, which should not take that long, but that it <br />cannot go right to a legal proceeding. <br />Walsh stated he would be amenable to that <br />Walsh moved to amend his previous motion and to direct Staff to send the property owner of 1356 <br />Rest Point Road a letter listing the violations, with the property owner being given 30 days to <br />comply. If the property is not brought into compliance, the City Council should move forward to <br />prosecution. <br />Cornick noted the ground is frozen and that the property owner should be given a reasonable amount of <br />time to comply. <br />Mattick stated if there is an option to move forward, Staff can investigate it, bring the results back in a <br />few weeks and then put forth a plan. Mattick indicated he would like to go into closed session to discuss <br />those items. Mattick stated at that time he could receive direction from the Council on whether civil or <br />criminal action should be pursued. <br />Walsh asked if that can be ready in two weeks. <br />Page 23 of 24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.