My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2018_0924
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2018
>
CC_Minutes_2018_0924
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2018 9:03:22 AM
Creation date
10/12/2018 9:03:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/24/2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, September 24, 2018 <br /> Page 9 <br /> Councilmember Etten stated he seconded the motion because he supported the <br /> concept but was curious about what timely meant for compliance. He thought the <br /> front-end piece should be more clearly defined. <br /> Mr. Englund stated one day after the action would be considered timely and have <br /> been duly noticed. <br /> Councilmember McGehee accepted the friendly amendment of Councilmember <br /> Etten to add 'if not in compliance by September 26, 2018'. <br /> Councilmember Etten asked how the City goes about the abatement. <br /> Mr. Englund stated he would propose the property owner and resident would be <br /> notified as done previously. He would prefer to give the property owner at least <br /> five days to make the repair so there is some notifying. <br /> Councilmember Etten thought there needed to be some sort of framing for that. <br /> City Attorney Gaughan stated the City Council would be delegating discretion to <br /> staff who has already been working with the property owner and has already had <br /> previous, similar matters with the property owner where compliance is gained on- <br /> ly late in the game. The suggestion would be the Council delegate discretion to <br /> its staff to work with the property owner to maintain full code compliance. <br /> Council action would be to approve the abatement, direct staff to proactively re- <br /> turn to the property on a monthly basis over the next six months and within that <br /> timeframe staff would use its discretion to work with the property owner. Staff <br /> not have to come back to the City Council with formal action in resolving this <br /> public nuisance condition. <br /> Mayor Roe thought from his point of view he would prefer not telling staff the <br /> time frame because each type of violation within the ones listed might require a <br /> different time frame and he would be happy to delegate the discretion to staff <br /> Councilmember McGehee stated she does not have any question about delegating <br /> authority to City staff <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte requested going forward that staff put photos in the <br /> packet for Council review. <br /> Mayor Roe thought the issue was with timing of the packet going out and the pho- <br /> tos being taken for the meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.