Laserfiche WebLink
<br />put class 5 material under each wheel, but the City turned that down. He stated that the City has <br />asked a local attorney to serve as the hearing examiner. He stated that because this is the first <br />administrative hearing, the costs will be a bit higher this time. The attorney is charging <br />$200/hour and he expects that the costs of his time will equal at least $500. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked if the attorney will ask for either party to submit proposed findings <br />for him to review. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that he will do that and noted that the hearing will be recorded, <br />however, not with a court reporter. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen confirmed that if the resident wanted to appeal the hearing results, he <br />would come before the City Council. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the resident could appeal even beyond the City Council if he <br />wanted, which is one of the reasons that the hearing will be recorded. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that there is a specific provision in the abatement process that calls <br />for the aggrieved party to state specifically what their position is and asked if this resident had <br />followed that procedure. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the resident had sent a letter to the City stating that he does <br />not like the action taken by the City and feels the City should not be involved in something that, <br />in his opinion, is minor and trivial. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated that this is on the agenda to discuss the difference between the <br />nuisance code and zoning code issues. He stated that overall the process has been working well, <br />but staff has run into a few situations where the usefulness of the abatement process has been <br />less clear. He noted the examples that were included in the meeting packet. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec asked what illegal home occupations meant on the list. <br /> <br />Interim Community Development Director Frolik stated that if there is no outward manifestation <br />of the business, the City does not require a home occupation permit, but if, for example, the <br />business wants to start bringing clients to the home, then a permit is required. She stated that <br />staff would like some direction on whether, if the City has confirmed that there is an illegal <br />business operating, the City should go in and take equipment and supplies and shut the business <br />down or if a ticket or fine should be issued. She stated in addition to these kinds of home <br />occupation violations, staff would like some direction on how much of a contractor the City <br />would like to be when a home needs to be painted, siding needs to be finished or broken <br />windows need to be repaired. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that he does not think the City should go in and roof a house or <br />paint a house. He stated that on the list is an example of moving accessory structures to meet <br />setbacks. He stated that he thinks this comes from the situation where there was a violation of <br />junk in someone's yard and he felt the City could have also moved the structure that was in the <br /> <br />City Council Work Session I December 11,2007 <br />Page 2 of8 <br />