My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2019_0415
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
CC_Minutes_2019_0415
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2019 2:55:42 PM
Creation date
5/7/2019 2:55:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
4/15/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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,April 15, 2019 <br /> Page 7 <br /> Councilmember Laliberte asked if the City Attorney had other recommendations <br /> to address this issue because this is private property and Ordinances are already in <br /> place for many of these things. <br /> City Attorney Gaughan stated this is a scenario without a great answer. People <br /> wonder why the government cannot do anything about these issues. He stated the <br /> City is not a homeowner association, the City is not in private contract with the <br /> property owners about what is done with their property. The City steps in when <br /> there has been an impact to the health, safety, and welfare or the community <br /> which gives the City the authority to pursue remedies for nuisance activities. He <br /> thought the best remedy would be to step in when the City has junk, abandoned <br /> and inoperable vehicles, which is the exact language of the existing code. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte asked what City Attorney Gaughan's position was on <br /> the storage and a vehicle being used as portable storage. <br /> City Attorney Gaughan stated he could see similar problems but not as many. As <br /> a government, the City needs to see what the remedy for that would be. He knew <br /> from past practices of this the homeowner puts a tarp of cover over the vehicle to <br /> get rid of some of the eyesore. <br /> Councilmember Willmus thought one of the things the City was looking at in re- <br /> gard to a vehicle being used as a storage facility is that it is completely packed <br /> with stuff. He thought if the vehicle is licensed and insured, where does the City <br /> stand because the vehicle is operable. <br /> Councilmember Groff stated this discussion is really helpful for him. He saw this <br /> as an Ordinance that could be used against people that do not have as much mon- <br /> ey as other people and is a concern for him. <br /> Mayor Roe stated after hearing from others, he thought the stored vehicle is prob- <br /> ably problematic for the City. He thought one of the ways the City might get at a <br /> vehicle with a lot of stuff in it is if there is stuff in the driver's seat, it is probably <br /> inoperable because the pedals can not probably be useable. He thought in each of <br /> these situations, it is only a violation if it remains after the warning is given with <br /> due opportunity to correct it without further action by the City. That is when it <br /> would go to the next level of enforcement. He could see a situation where some- <br /> thing could be added under the definition of inoperable vehicle something to the <br /> effect of"unable to be safely driven given the contents." <br /> Mayor Roe did not think that the Council had a problem with adding the unau- <br /> thorized vehicle language because that is a direct reference to State Statute which <br /> gives municipalities authority to impound or otherwise deal with enforcement of <br /> those types of vehicles and that is really talking about some very clear types of <br /> violations. He would not have a problem with that, but thought the portable stor- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.