Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Kiefer stated that because of the Hearing Examiner's bias, he was not allowed to submit this <br />into the testimony. He stated that there was no proof offered, other than verbal testimony that <br />the property is zoned R-1. He stated that there was a map shown from the Community <br />Development Department that was not the official zoning map. He stated that he tried to offer an <br />official zoning map, but the Hearing Examiner did not accept it. He stated that the Hearing <br />Examiner claimed that this was a civil matter, but the State Statutes show that District Courts <br />have jurisdiction over civil matters. He stated that the State of Minnesota has not granted the <br />City of Ramsey any authority to conduct any kind of hearings. He stated that the Conclusions <br />refer to Ramsey Ordinance 7.01.08 which is as bogus as you can get. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich noted that this ordinance was listed in error. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that in Minnesota Statute 14.55 there is not authority granted to the City for <br />this. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig asked how long the van was parked in this position. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that it was alleged from the testimony of Witness #1 that it was there from <br />November 27,2007 to May 5, 2008, but the document he has shows the date was December 18, <br />2008. He stated he feels the evidence does not support the claim. He stated that he was denied <br />due process by the notice claiming that vehicle was parked in the rear, not on the driveway, <br />however the claim was changed at the hearing saying the vehicle was parked in the front on the <br />landscaping. He reiterated that he feels he was denied due process. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that there is a requirement that Mr. Kiefer provide a written <br />response when a citation is given. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that he did submit a written. response. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich confirmed that Mr. Kiefer submitted a Refusal for Cause, but it was not <br />introduced into evidence. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that he feels the City is digging itself a very deep hole by pursuing this. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated that since Mr. Kiefer says he doesn't own the property he asked if <br />the ownership was recorded somewhere. He asked what was shown in County records. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that it shows somebody else owns the property. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look asked if the van became an issue after the abatement. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that this has nothing to do with abatement and is a completely separate issue. <br />He stated that there has always been a vehicle there. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look asked if the van showed up after the abatement. <br /> <br />Special City Council Meeting / September 2, 2008 <br />Page 4 of9 <br />