Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, October 27, 2008 <br />Page 9 <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Willmus; Roe; Ihlan; Pust; and Klausing. <br />Nays: None. <br />c. Consider City Abatement for Code Violations at 411 South Owasso Boule- <br />vard <br />Permit Coordinator Don Munson summarized the staff report dated October 27, <br />2008. However, Mr. Munson noted that, based on the Nellessen's letter included <br />in the packet, they have requested City help in paying a portion of the repair costs, <br />contending that the City should have provided them with sewer service by gravity <br />feed when the City main was installed in the 1960's, and/or were requesting that <br />they be allowed to repay the charges over a five year period. <br />Mr. Munson also noted the response to the Nellessen's by the City's Consulting <br />Engineer, Roger Short of Banister Engineering in a letter dated June 13, 1961 and <br />also included in the packet. <br />Mr. Munson advised that staff was recommending that the City Council direct <br />staff to abate the above-referenced public nuisance violation at 411 Owasso <br />Boulevard South and to assess the charges over a five year period at an interest <br />rate to be determined by the City's Finance Director. <br />Discussion included whether there was a state or county program to defer prop- <br />erty taxes, and whether this property would apply. <br />Mr. Munson noted the difficulty in some elderly residents in completing such <br />processes or complying with those types of programs, even with considerable ad- <br />ministrative assistance from staff. <br />City Attorney Jay Squires clarified that the State Law and City Code was specific <br />to a process for senior citizens to request deferrals; but since this was for a code <br />violation, those provisions would not apply. <br />Further discussion included a history of contact with the property owners and <br />neighboring complaints and frequency of those complaints; the property owner <br />only being in residence for a portion of the year and gone during winter months; <br />staff s contact with property owners during 2006, and lack of compliance by year- <br />end, causing the action to be brought forth again this summer; controversy be- <br />tween the City and staff on the cause of the smell (i.e., road work or environ- <br />mental or weather related) as to the cause of the leakage and lack of complaints <br />since the initial concerns were raised during a wet time of the year. <br />Councilmember Pust opined that, given environmental concerns based on prox- <br />imity to the lake, this item needed immediate abatement. Councilmember Pust <br />