Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuisance Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews nuisance-ordinance revisions; public commenter urges raising petition threshold
Summary
Councilors examined edits to align nuisance-abatement procedure with current practice, discussed whether the petition requirement (currently three nearby neighbors) should be raised to six Glendive citizens, and approved sending the draft to legal review.
Get email alerts on the Nuisance Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Glendive city councilors spent substantial time reviewing proposed revisions to the nuisance ordinance aimed at aligning written procedure with how staff currently handles abatement and lien steps.
Council members discussed removing a requirement for a preliminary title report that staff said is often redundant because the city can access title information via existing services. The draft clarifies that council-adopted abatement resolutions will be part of the resolution record; staff noted they have not historically filed a certified copy with the Dawson County Clerk and Recorder and proposed removing that redundant step from the ordinance.
Public commenter Bruce Miller, who spoke during the ordinance-committee meeting, told the committee and council that requiring three neighbors in close proximity to sign a nuisance petition makes it difficult to file complaints; he suggested changing the threshold to six Glendive citizens and said the trailer-permit requirement creates hardships for contractors. The committee will forward the revised draft to legal for review; at this meeting council voted to send the nuisance-ordinance changes to the city attorney for legal review.
Council members also discussed recordkeeping for repeat offenders and whether prior nuisance findings should follow the property or the owner; staff said a searchable list exists and can be used to track repeat issues and to enforce limitations on extensions for repeat offenders.
No ordinance changes were adopted at the meeting; the council instructed staff to incorporate legal feedback and return a revised draft.

