Agenda - Council - 08/14/2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

pleading with this gentleman, and he keeps reassuring he will do it; there is no credibility based upon his actions. He would like to get the individual's perspective. He is in favor of giving him a hearing and seeing what he has to say. Councilmember Olson stated she has no interest in going after this individual. If anything, the City should have passed the abatement ordinance sooner, and it will deal with the problem. The ordinance was just passed and they have not had an opportunity yet to deal with this individual through the ordinance. Interim City Administrator Nelson indicated there are amendments that are needed to Chapter 5 to proceed with some of the abatement issues. City Attorney Goodrich advised there should be a fair amount of things that can be addressed through the ordinance as far as junk and auto parts. City Attorney Goodrich advised there will need to be a decision on whether to dismiss the ongoing criminal prosecution in order to proceed with the abatement process. It may be that these can be parallel processes. Councilmember Dehen stated the criminal prosecution ended December 14, 2006 with this continuation for dismissal, with 18 months allowed for clean up. The reason most prosecutors do not like continuance for dismissal is because if the violator does not clean up they need to start the prosecution over at square one. If the person admits to the violation and does not meet the conditions they are in consequence mode. In his perspective with a file this thick it is not mercy mode any more; it is consequence mode. Chairperson Jeffrey stated he recognizes there is a legal discussion that needs to take place with Attorney Tom Fitzpatrick. A recommendation is needed on whether the criminal suit needs to be dropped if they are going to proceed, and how soon the abatement ordinance can be enacted. He would prefer to enact the ordinance and deal with the personnel issue separately. He does not know that proper direction can be given until a legal opinion is given. City Attorney Goodrich advised clean up of the premises and how they will do that is one subject. The issue dealing with personnel is whether or not to dismiss a committee member from the EDA, and whether to hold a hearing. Councilmember Dehen stated his sense is that he thinks they are all in agreement that the property needs to be cleaned up. If they do it through the abatement process there will be a lot of money involved. It will likely involve over $10,000 of City money for a commission member that should be doing it on his own. Moreover, the second issue is that he would like the opportunity for the individual to be heard, with everyone able to weigh in on whether they think this stuff that is costing the City a lot of money is related to anything that the individual does on the EDA, or whether it brings the City into some sort of disrepute. City Attorney Goodrich requested Chairperson Jeffrey to weigh in on the hearing, as Councilmember Olson has indicated she does not want to go this route. Personnel Committee / July 24, 2007 Page 4 of 6