Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Motion by Councilmember Olson, seconded by Councilmember Strommen, to waive City <br />Charter requirement to read the ordinance aloud; and adopt Ordinance #08-26 to vacate certain <br />drainage and utility easements with TC Trail. <br /> <br />A roll call vote was performed by the Recording Secretary. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen: aye <br />Councilmember Strommen: aye <br />Councilmember Elvig: aye <br />Councilmember Jeffrey: aye <br />Councilmember Olson: aye <br />Councilmember Look: aye <br />Mayor Gamec: aye <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Case #2: <br /> <br />Consider Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Relating to Vehicle Parked <br />in Violation of City Code at 6203 Rivlyn Avenue NW <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich distributed section 5.30 of the City Code and reviewed the language. He <br />stated that this item is to discuss a Notice of Appeal that has been filed by Mr. Kiefer regarding <br />the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. He stated that the Council shall review the decision <br />and the Findings of Fact from the document dated July 14,2008. He stated that the City alleged, <br />and the Hearing Examiner found, that a white van has been illegally parked on the property at <br />6203 Rivlyn Avenue NW and that Mr. Keith Kiefer is the owner of the property and the van. He <br />stated that the van was parked illegally on November 27,2007 and May 5, 2008. He stated that <br />in this instance, the Council is acting as the Court of Appeals. He stated in this process, Mr. <br />Kiefer will be given 20 minutes to make his appeal argument, the City will be given 20 minutes <br />to respond to his argument and after this, the Council can make a decision. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that when another case came before the Council regarding the <br />pawn shop, it ended up being a situation where the factual issues were re-debated. He asked if <br />this would be the same and the issues would be re-debated. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that this is not a new trial, but an appeal of what has already been <br />written by the Hearing Examiner. He stated that Mr. Kiefer should not be making new testimony <br />and reviewing everything from A to Z again, but should make specific arguments about what <br />mistakes he feels the Hearing Examiner allegedly made. <br /> <br />Mr. Keith Kiefer, 6203 Rivlyn Avenue NW, Ramsey introduced himself for the record. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich noted that the arguments by Mr. Kiefer began at 7:36 p.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that he wanted to make it clear that he doesn't recognize this as a legal process, <br />because the City is party to this action and does not feel that they can lawfully serve as a judge. <br /> <br />Special City Council Meeting / September 2, 2008 <br />Page 2 of9 <br />