Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-09-1985 Minutes MINUTES OF THE CITY OF OCOKK CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING HELD DECEMBER 09, 1985 I . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Frank Carlsson, Vice Chairman Ed Foley , Members Mary Ellen Frame , John Linebarier , Gary Carroll , Joe Marbais and Bob Sorenson, City Manager Ken Griffin, Attorney John Hatcher, Building Official Sam Gerace , Building Inspector Bill Hager, Fire Inspector James Coschignano and Deputy Clerk Susan Amesbury . ABSENT: Alternate Donald Barker Chairman Carlsson called the meeting to order at 7: 37 p .m. Mr. Linebarier led everyone in prayer and Chairman Carlsson led everyone in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. II . REVIEW & APPROVAL' OF MINUTES Mr. Linebarier asked that his name be listed as absent in the November 11, 1985 minutes. Mr . Marbais made a motion to accept the minutes of the November 11, 1985 meeting as corrected, seconded by Mr . Foley and approved unanimously. III . VIOLATIONS HEARINGS A. Case 85-26 , Charles Gould As a matter of record, Mr . Gould was present as was his mother-in-law, Mrs. Laura Howell . At this time Building Official Gerace and Mr . Gould were sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury. Building Official Gerace stated the City had reinspected Mr . Gould' s property at 3:00 p .m. on December 09, 1985 and found him still in non-compliance . Chairman Carlsson read the description of Violation from the Notice of Code Violations as "junk vehicle, brown El Dorado - 1975 Cadillac - Tag #XT6-966 , expired 8/3/85 with a flat tire and no battery . " Mr. Gould acknowledged receipt of this document and stated the car was registered on August 30, 1985 , did not have a flat tire , had a current sticker and felt the City was trying to deny his right to a hobby of cars. At this time Laura Howell was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury. She stated the car in question belonged to her and that it had been taged since August 30 , 1985 and that the car had a battery . Chairman Carlsson questioned her as to the last time it was driven and Mrs. Howell answered 2 or 3 weeks ago . Mr . Sorenson questioned her about the driveable condition of the car presently and Mrs . Howell answered that it was driveable at this time . Building Inspector Hager was sworn in and he stated he had checked the car at 3:00 p.m. on December 09 , 1985 and to his knowledge the car had been sitting in the yard since November 25 , 1985. Mr . Linebarier questioned Mr . Hager about the statement of Violation he signed on November 25 , 1985 stating Mr . Gould was still in non-compliance . Mr . Linebarier asked if Mr . Hager physically checked the sticker and the tire . Mr . Hager stated he had not . Mr . Linebarier asked Mr . Gould for his registration ticket , it was given to him and upon his inspection of the document he stated the ticket was a second copy issued on November 27 , 1985. Mr . Linebarier asked Mr . Gould if he attached the yellow sticker to the car , Mr . Gould stated he did not . Mrs. Howell stated it was attached on August 30 , 1985 by one of her sons . Mr . Carroll asked why the duplicate copy of the registration was issued and Mrs . Howell replied that her children had lost the first . At this time , City Manager Griffin , Mr. Gould and Mrs. Howell left to go and reinspect the car per the motion of Mr . Linebarier to table the case for approximately 30 minutes or until City Manager Griffin and Mr . Gould could return from the reinspection, seconded by Mr. Sorenson and approved unanimously . Time: 7: 56 p.m. CEB 12/09/85, PAGE 2 At 8 :25 Case #85-26 on Charles Gould resumed. Mr. Linebarier asked City (1100, Manager Griffin if the car was in compliance with the City ordinance and City Manager Griffin replied that strictly speaking yes. Mr . Linebarier moved that the Board find Mr . Gould in compliance and dismiss the case , seconded by Mrs . Frame and motion carried unanimously . B. Case 85-27, Patti A. Helms As a matter of record, Mr. Helms was present to represent Patti Helms. At this point Mr . Helms was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Amesbury . Mr . Gerace stated at 3:00 p .m. on November 09 , 1985 the City had reinspected the Helms property and found them to still be in non-compliance . Mr . Helms stated he was in the process of restoring the Olds and Mustang. Chairman Carlsson questioned where on the property the cars were located and Mr. Helms stated they were on the driveway and beside the carport . Chairman Carlsson stated that the ordinance reads that the vehicle must be protected from the elements and since they were not , Mr . Helms was in violation of the ordinance . Mr. Carroll asked Mr. Helms if he had a location for the 2 vehicles and Mr . Helms answered that he did not . Attorney Hatcher asked Mr . Helms what was in his carport and Mr . Helms stated nothing was . Attorney Hatcher asked Mr . Helms if the cars were driveable and Mr . Helms stated they were not . Also questioned by Attorney Hatcher was how long before the cars would be driveable and Mr. Helms answered that the Olds could be fixed by the first of January , 1986 or at the earliest 2 weeks due to the process of installing a timing chain. He also stated he intended to sell the Oldsmobile afterwards. Chairman Carlsson questioned whether the cars were in Mr . Helms name and Mr . Helms answered yes. Mr . Marbais asked Mr . Helms how long the cars had been there and Mr. Helms stated 6 years. Mr. Linebarier asked Mr . Helms if the Mustang in question was the same one cited last year by the City for violation of the same ordinance and Mr . Helms answered yes. Mr . Linebarier moved that Mr . Helms be directed to have the Mustang in the carport no later than Friday , December 13 , 1985 and 10 days from today to have the Oldsmobile in running condition (December 19 , 1985) and operable with registration with a $25 .00 a day penalty for each day of non- compliance thereafter . Seconded by Mr . Marbais. At this point Mr . Sorenson questioned whether 10 days was really long enough for the timing chain process and suggested the Board give Mr . Helms 14 days. Mr . Helms agreed that 2 weeks was adequate time . Mr. Sorenson made a motion to amend the original motion on the Oldsmobile only to change the date of compliance from 10 to 14 days giving Mr . Helms until December 23 , 1985 to have the Oldsmobile tagged and in running condition, seconded by Mr . Carroll and amending motion carried unanimously . Then the vote on the original motion as amended was approved unanimously . As a matter of record, Mr . Helms was given and signed two (2) Compliance orders in the presence of Deputy Clerk Amesbury . IV. OTHER BUSINESS No Comments V. COMMENTS A. City Manager - None B. Fire Inspector - None C. Building Official - None D. Board Attorney - Attorney Hatcher stated he was still concerned with the junk vehicle ordinance. Whether a car has a current tag or not should not be the issue , but rather whether the car is operable . CEB 12/09/85, PAGE 3 He also stated he felt the ordinance needed to be clearer to the people filing charges and following up . Also he felt traveling during meeting time, although it handled the case tonight , was not really proper. E. Citizens - None F. Board Members - Mr. Linebarier stated that when City employees sign statements under oath, they need to be sure of exactly what they are swearing to. Chairman Carlsson asked Fire Inspector Coschignano to introduce himself to the Board, which he did. Chairman Carlsson wished everyone a Merry Christmas. VI . ADJOURNMENT By unanimous consent of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8 :37 p .m. 1 c. Fr. . Carlsson, Sr. Chairman ATTEST: L Susan Amesbury , Deputy Clem