2006_0424_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Regular Meeting — 04/10/06 DRAFT Minutes - Page 16 Discussion included past practice and delegation of authority to staff; clarification of the proposed process as proscribed by the City Attorney; designation of independent hearing officer (not on staf�; Councilmember Pust outlined the proposed process: the Police Chief issues a letter to the violator and recommends to the City Council that a citation be issued; the City Council determines whether or not to enforce the code, and if a citation is issued, the violator has ten days to appeal, with a hearing before an independent hearing officer; with the independent hearing officer making a recommendation to the City Council following the appeal hearing; with the City Council mal�ing the final decision. City Attorney Anderson concurred with Councilmember Pust's summary; clarifying that the City Council would not hold the evidentiary hearing. Further discussion included knowledge and consideration of past violations with someone, on behalf of the City, providing evidence to past violations and the hearing examiner considering prior history as part of the proposed penalty. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her concern that the three cases from 2005, where a violation occurred and mandatory minimum requirement set forth by ordinance was not imposed, needed to be reconsidered. Pust moved, Maschka seconded, authorizing the City Attorney to amend City Ordinance, Chapter 302, to incorporate the five-point process as outlined in the legal opinion dated April 5, 2006 and to provide consistency with Minnesota Statute, Chapter 340A; and to return to the City Council with a draft ordinance for Council consideration and action.