Laserfiche WebLink
� - � <br /> had the matter set for hearing but later continued it for dismissal <br /> until July 23, 1985, upon the decision of the City Council to allow <br /> Mr. Henke additional time to complete the necessary improvements . <br /> The City Council arrived at its decision to extend the period after <br /> holding a public hearing on the matter and allowing Mr. Henke to <br /> testify. Subsequent to the hearing, a letter from the City <br /> Attorney was sent to Mr. Henke setting forth an explanation of the <br /> City's position. See Exhibit B. <br /> Mr. Henke did not correct the hazardous condition of his <br /> property in the extended time period. Instead, he steadfastly <br /> adhered to his position that he did not have a duty to correct the <br /> deficiencies of his building. On October 10, 1985, the City <br /> notified the District Court that a trial date was needed as the <br /> matter had not been resolved. A trial was set for June 10, 1986 . <br /> Subsequently, the prosecution was dismissed by the prosecutor upon <br /> consultation and agreement with the City staff that successful <br /> pr�.secution of the matter would not afford the City a remedy that <br /> would cause Mr. Henke to make the repairs. Therefore, the City has <br /> chosen to pursue condemnation of the house as provided for in <br /> UBC/SBC Section 203 . To that end the City staff has requested a <br /> hearing before the Administrative Law Judge in order to move <br /> forward pursuant to Section 203 . <br /> ` ANALYSIS <br /> Section 2 .01 of the City of Orono Municipal Code (code) <br /> incorporates by reference the State Building Code, 1982 edition, as <br /> amended by rules published and adopted in the State Register date8 <br /> -4- <br />