Citizens voice concerns over newly amended nuisance ordinance

On Tuesday evening, three Maplewood residents voiced their objections to the updated wording of the Maplewood nuisance ordinance, saying they didn’t believe the city was doing enough to resolve the issues.

In a public forum held during the city council meeting, Maplewood residents Kyle Oberle, Jim Breihan, and Jason Goldkamp addressed the council, commending them for taking the first step in amending the broken ordinance, but saying they did not believe the proposed amendments would resolve the fundamental problems with the ordinance.

“I am distressed by the proposed nuisance ordinance. We are not facing the fullness of the problematic nature of our ordinance,” Oberle, the first to raise an objection, said. “I simply do not see the justice of forcing someone out of our community. Such behavior does not make us compassionate neighbors to each other.”

Jim Breihan followed him to the podium, voicing similar distress with the nature of the ordinance, and saying he was “very upset” by City Manager Marty Corcoran’s statement that the settlement was a “purely financial decision.” (This statement was made by Marty Corcoran at the previous meeting on September 11). Breihan urged the Council to “take the issue a lot more seriously than that because it’s much more than just money.”

The final dissent was made by Jason Goldkamp, who stated, “I don’t want an exile portion of the nuisance ordinance. I don’t think it’s the city’s place to displace people from their homes and their children from their schools.”

However, despite the objections, the council unanimously voted to approve the agreed upon changes to the nuisance ordinance, which will take effect on October 10.

The council also approved a bill establishing the 2018 tax rates for the city of Maplewood, raising residential taxes by 10.6 cents.

3 thoughts on “Citizens voice concerns over newly amended nuisance ordinance

    • Yes, but the Maplewood residents who addressed the council last night were saying that the city could do more than just what the ACLU had required.

    • The ACLU agreed to the changes as an improvement to the ordinance as part of the settlement. They’ve also said they’d like to continue to work with the city to make more changes to it. The ordinance allows eviction from the town, which a lot of ppl still don’t agree with.