Minutes - Council - 09/02/2008 - Special

Home

City Attorney Goodrich stated that this is the Refusal for Cause that was mentioned earlier and included the same subjects Mr. Kiefer discussed tonight. He stated that Mr. Kiefer was sent a list of witnesses which identified fairly specifically what the witnesses would testify to. He stated that Mr. Kiefer was called as a rebuttal witness because he stated that he was not the property owner, so there was no obligation to give him notice of that. He stated that the van was there at various times and Officer Schiferli testified that he saw the van there many times, issued a ticket on November 27,2007, that he saw it also in March of 2008 and again on May 5, 2008, the day of the hearing. He stated that he took pictures and testified to that at the hearing. He stated that the aerial photo Mr. Kiefer referred to wasn't admitted into evidence because it was 35 years old and the Hearing Examiner found that irrelevant. He stated that the City submitted a depiction of the zone, not the City's official zoning map, but it clearly showed the location of the property and that it is in the R-1 District. He stated that he contends that the City has proven that Mr. Kiefer is the owner of the property at 6203 Rivlyn Avenue NW, Ramsey, MN, that it is zoned R- 1, that the white van was parked there at least on November 27, 2007 and May 5, 2008 on the easterly side of the property. He stated that City Code section 9.11 regulates off street parking restrictions and this vehicle is clearly not parked on bituminous or concrete surface. He stated that the City needs to prove its case on a preponderance of evidence. He read aloud section 9.11 of the City Code. He stated that this vehicle is parked in the side or rear yard and not on the driveway and is therefore in violation of City Code. He stated that he is asking the Council to confirm the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. Mayor Gamec asked if the vehicle was in the same position all the time. City Attorney Goodrich stated that it was generally in the same area, but never in front of the privacy fence. Councilmember Dehen stated that the transcript ofthe testimony indicated that the vehicle hadn't been moved from its location. City Attorney Goodrich noted that there were pictures introduced into testimony related to the location of the vehicle. Councilmember Jeffrey asked where the vehicle is parked today. Mr. Kiefer stated that it is parked on the driveway, the same place it has always been. City Attorney Goodrich stated that it is not parked on the driveway, but in the side yard. Councilmember Dehen stated that, in his opinion, this is a disgrace and has been since 1992. He asked how relevant the history of this property is to the Council. He asked if the Council can be apprised of the history of this property because he thinks it is relevant for everyone to know what has been occurring and how long it has been occurring. City Attorney Goodrich stated that none of that information is relevant and the Council was here to only discuss the Findings of Fact by Mr. Scott dated July14, 2008. Special City Council Meeting I September 2, 2008 Page 6 of9