Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Dehen stated that judges can take into consideration other information III <br />determining their recommendations and thinks that it should also be a function of this body. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich noted that this is not a criminal hearing and there is not a range of <br />penalties available. He stated that the City chose to pursue abatement, so the choice is to abate <br />this or not to abate it. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated that there are three ways this can be addressed; criminally, <br />administratively, or abatement. He stated that he would be in favor of imposing whatever <br />administrative fine the City can. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich reiterated that the City chose the abatement process and cannot do the <br />others at this time. <br /> <br />'; <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey stated that if the City chose to accept the Hearing Examiner's <br />recommendation whether Mr. Kiefer moving the vehicle to a paved surface in front of his home, <br />would take care of the situation. ' <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that moving the vehicle to the City defined driveway would take <br />care of the problem. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey asked if Mr. Kiefer moved the vehicle to the approved place, the City <br />said case closed, and then Mr. Kiefer once again parked the vehicle in the side yard, if the whole <br />process started over again. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that if this happened, the whole process could be started again, but <br />noted that the City has three options, abatement, criminal or administrative. <br /> <br />Mr. Kiefer stated that he feels it is very significant for this body to read the definition of a <br />driveway and take a look at where the garage is located. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that the courts have come to the conclusion that Mr. Kiefer owns the <br />property and the van. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich corrected the Mayor and noted that the courts did not conclude that Mr. <br />Kiefer is the owner of the van, but the owner of the property and the van is parked on his <br />property. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec read through the Findings of Fact and noted that he feels this is a conflict of the <br />City ordinance. He stated that all the evidence presented shows that Mr. Kiefer is one of the <br />owners of the property and he doesn't see any reason why the City wouldn't agree with the <br />Hearing Examiner. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that he supports affirming the Findings of Fact and asked how Mr. <br />Kiefer would like to resolve the situation. <br /> <br />Special City Council Meeting / September 2, 2008 <br />Page 7of9 <br />