Item 3A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

would still go forward. Ms. Miller agreed that the inspection could proceed. City Attorney Glenn Klein said that eliminating the word "written" would allow for any method of notification, including voicemail, fax, or email. Mr. Pap~ used the example of an owner being out of state and asked if there was a way to require 24-hour actual notice if receipt was 'confirmed or five days' written notice. Mr. Klein said he could provide draft language but his understanding of Mr. Poling's intent was the removal of the additional days from the notice period. He suggested a straw vote to determine if there was interest in Mr. Papa's suggestion. Mayor Torrey called for a show of hands and determined there was not support for Mr. Papa's change to the notice provision. Mr. Pap~ stated his concern with the shortened notice period and reiterated his preference for actual notice that confirmed receipt by the owner. Mr. Pap6 moved to change the notice requirement from 24 to 48 hours. The mo- tion died for lack of a second. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the notice provision only went into effect if the landlord, owner, or owner's agent had previously been notified of the problem and given ten days to correct it. The motion to amend the ordinance by adding a final sentence to Section 8.430(4) passed unanimously. Mr. Poling moved, seconded by Ms. Bettman, to amend Section 8.430(5)(a)4 as set forth in Section 1 of the Ordinance, to provide as follows: "4. A deadline for completing repairs often days, unless the city manager deter- mines that the necessary repairs cannot be completed within the ten-day period. If the city manager makes such a determination, the owner or owner's agent shall submit a compliance schedule acceptable to the city within ten days." Mr. Poling said the addition of wording regarding the deadline for completing repairs provided some flexibility for instances when circumstances beyond an owner's control prevented repairs within the ten day period. Mr. Kelly thanked staff for offering the revised language, which struck a balance between language that was too restrictive or too open-ended; it established an expectation of ten days and allowed flexibility under unusual circumstances as determined by the City Manager. Ms. Solomon asked what would happen if the repairs required the landlord to obtain a permit that could take longer than ten days to obtain. Ms. Miller said that the language would allow a reasonable compli- ance schedule to be established that would accommodate the need for a permit. The motion to amend Section 8.430(5)(a)4 of the ordinance passed unanimously. Speaking to the amended main motion, Ms. Nathanson expressed concern with the scope and cost of the program. She said the council was interested in an enforcement program, not an information program. She pointed out that the Corvallis program had become primarily an information and help program and MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 2004 Page 8 Work Session