04/15/2008 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 4/15/2008 relationship between our city and other government entities. That's what his purpose was and that's why he set up the meeting. Sometimes you talk about a specific issue and it brings out a general problem that should be addressed. What better place to discuss in a committee in open forum where people can come up and express their views and go forward. He expects this to be an on-going dialogue and hopes to assist and give information to Council. That is his purpose. Law Director commented he thinks giving the President of Council more authority to direct the flow of city business in individual committees improves the process of getting good legislation passed. It's nothing against Mr. Ryan. In fact, under the current rules, he supports what Mr. Ryan is doing. Dani Lee, 4149 Walter Road, remains concerned about Ordinance 2008-44 and feels it does say that inspectors can enter a house. It says, when anowner/occupant denies property maintenance officer entry, then the city can go for the search warrant to enter the property. She does not think this is correct. The code does not specify interior or exterior, so at any time it could change. As an owner and occupant who also has a handicapped son, she is concerned he might let someone of authority who knocks on the door into the house. This needs to be clarified that no one will enter a home without the owner's permission and only with a good reason. She said a resident who picked up a copy of the ordinance was asked by someone in the office what they had against maintaining properties and should we allow people to let rats and things run rampant in the houses. She wondered if this was something to be worried about. Councilman Gareau said he is certainly not aware of it. Law Director said the legislation language is a little bit broad. The new language is tracking on the old language which also mentions premises and buildings. He does not think it is language that is so imprecise that it causes a legal problem. If there are structures on the property, we can get into debates as to whether going into premises includes walking on a back deck. The language is a little bit inclusive to cover any outdoor structures or grass. It's stated broadly to cover any possible scenario of being outside and walking on a structure. If language is a problem, we can always go back and fine tune it a little bit. The effecriveness of laws and how they play out is how they are administered by the administration. The Safety Director came forward and very strongly indicated that nobody is going to go, under her watch, inside buildings for exterior maintenance. In the past, a search warrant procedure was not in the code. One of the reasons why the Law Dept. made that change was to send a message to future safety directors and future building inspectors that their job is to see what they can see from the street. If a responsible owner/occupant, an adult, wants to give them consent to come in for some reason to see something that may manifest itself on the outside, but has an inside component, that is one thing. But an inspector cannot go further than they should without consent. A search warrant is granted by a court, which has to be convinced that probable cause exists of a violation of that exterior code. He is comfortable this is not going to be abused 12 .,,,K.~ a