11/14/1990 MUNICIPAL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
November 14, 1990
Members present:
William Murray, Chairman
Bruce Cardinal, Vice-Chairman
Robert Aude
William Zinzow
D. Wayne Wyatt
John McKinney
Louise C. Riley
Also present:
Miles Lance, Assistant City Attorney
Andy Salzman, Attorney for the Board
Cynthia E. Goudeau, Secretary for the Board
In order to provide continuity for research, the items will be listed in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order.
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 3:00 p.m. in the Commission Meeting Room in City Hall. He outlined the procedures and advised any aggrieved party may appeal a final
administrative order of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board to the Circuit Court of Pinellas County. Any such appeal must be filed within thirty (30) days of the execution of the order
to be appealed. He noted that Florida Statute 286.0105 requires any party appealing a decision of this Board to have a record of the proceedings to support such an appeal.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1
- Case No. 1 Olga Wendling
vacant lot at about 608 Marshal St aka
Norwood Sub, Blk A, Lot 4
No one was present to represent the violator.
Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated this is a vacant lot which he first inspected September 17th. He stated the lot is overgrown. Ownership was verified through the Pinellas County
tax rolls; the property was posted and notice sent to the owner on October 23rd. The return receipt has been received. He reinspected the property this morning and the violation still
exists. Mr. Rosa submitted City composite exhibit A, including a copy of the notice and photographs of the property.
In response to questions, the Inspector stated there has been no verbal contact with the owners, and it is a residential area. He stated it appears the house has been vacant for a
while, and the inspection was initiated by a complaint.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 1 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about
608 Marshal St aka Norwood Sub, Blk A, Lot 4, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November,
1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -a copy of the file of record,
it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at the above address.
The Conclusions of Law are: Olga Wendling is in violation of Section 95.04.
It is the Order of this Board that Olga Wendling shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/24/90). Upon failure to comply within the
time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Olga Wendling. The City
Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative cost. Such
cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien, in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas
County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost
shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Olga Wendling shall notify Rick Rosa, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board
of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
- Case No. 2 First Home Builders Inc.
vacant lot about 512 N Washington Ave aka
Country Club Addn, Blk 8, Lot 11
No one was present to represent the violator.
Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated the lot is overgrown, a violation of Section 95.04. Ownership was verified through the Pinellas County tax rolls. Mr. Rosa stated he inspected and
posted the property the 17th and 18th of October, respectively. Notice was sent certified mail and returned undeliverable. Mr. Rosa stated he did search for another address and found
the company was no longer in business. He reinspected the property this morning and the violation still exists.
Discussion ensued whether the owner of the company should have been cited along with the corporation, and whether citing the corporation was enough. The Attorney for the Board stated
the notification was sufficient.
In response to a question, Mr. Rosa stated he did not check with the Department of State or the Postal Service for a forwarding address. He submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy
of the file of record.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 2 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at about
512 N Washington Ave aka Country Club Addn, Blk 8, Lot 11, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day
of November, 1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -a copy of the file of record,
it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at
the above address.
The Conclusions of Law are: First Home Builders Inc. is in violation of Section 95.04.
It is the Order of this Board that First Home Builders Inc. shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/24/90). Upon failure to comply
within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to First Home Builders
Inc. The City Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative
cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien, in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records
of Pinellas County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost.
Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, First Home Builders Inc. shall notify Rick Rosa, the City Official who shall inspect the property
and notify the Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried
unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
- Case No. 3 Daisy Williams
900 LaSalle St aka Palm Park Sub., Blk C, Lot 16
No one was present to represent the violator.
Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, stated this is a vacant lot in violation of Sections 95.04(a) & (b) of the City Code. She verified ownership through the Pinellas County tax rolls, sent
notice certified mail and the letter came back marked that the person is deceased. Ms. Doherty stated she inspected the property October 10th and posted it October 12th. She reinspected
the property this morning and the violation still exists.
In response to a question regarding mail which comes back with no known address or person deceased, it was stated notification of a lien would be sent to the same address or person
if none other is on file.
In response to a question, it was stated cases are filed both from complaints received and violations noted by the Inspectors.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 3 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 900 LaSalle
St aka Palm Park Sub, Blk C, Lot 16, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November, 1990, and
based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -a copy of the file of record,
it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at the above address.
The Conclusions of Law are: Daisy Williams is in violation of Section 95.04.
It is the Order of this Board that Daisy Williams shall comply with Section
95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/24/90). Upon failure to comply within the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and
such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Daisy Williams. The City Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which
remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien,
in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the
time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Daisy
Williams shall notify Geri Doherty, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may
request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
- Case No. 4 Michael J. Bobowski
3265 Pine Haven Dr aka Countryside Tract 5, Lot 66
There was no one present to represent the violator.
Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, stated she received a complaint that a lot was overgrown. She felt the front yard was not in violation with growth at about eight inches; the back yard
is in excess of twelve inches. She verified ownership through
the Pinellas County tax rolls, sent notice certified mail and the signed receipt was returned. She inspected the property October 17th, posted it October 18th, and has not had any
verbal contact with the owner. Ms. Doherty submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy of the file of record.
In response to a question, Ms. Doherty stated the house is vacant.
Discussion ensued regarding citing a portion of a lot and whether the City can go in fenced property. John Richter, Development Code Manager, stated the interpretation of the Legal
Department, regarding public nuisances in a fenced in area, is City personnel can enter the area.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 4 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 3265 Pine
Haven Drive aka Countryside Tract 5, Lot 66, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November, 1990,
and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -a copy of the file of record,
it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at the above address.
The Conclusions of Law are: Michael J. Bobowski is in violation of Section 95.04.
It is the Order of this Board that Michael J. Bobowski shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/24/90). Upon failure to comply within
the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Michael J. Bobowski.
The City Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative cost.
Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien, in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas
County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost
shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Michael J. Bobowski shall notify Geri Doherty, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the
Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
- Case No. 5 Richard S. Truesdale
1404-1410 N Madison Ave aka Fairmont Sub, Lots 6 & 7
No one was present to represent the violator.
Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, stated there are two vacant overgrown lots at the referenced address. Ownership was verified through the Pinellas County tax rolls, notice was sent certified
mail and the signed receipt was returned. The property was inspected October 4th and posted October 5th. She reinspected the property this morning and it is still overgrown. Ms. Doherty
submitted City composite exhibit A, a copy of the notice and a photograph.
In response to a question, she stated she has had no other contact with the
violator, and she can not locate him.
Discussion ensued regarding to what extent the Inspectors need to search for forwarding addresses and other information regarding property owners. Consensus of the Board was the Inspectors
should search further than they are. It was stated that, once a lien is filed, staff continues to search for current owner address in order to notify them of the lien.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 5 of Public Nuisance Clearing List 90-11-1 regarding violation of Section 95.04 of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 1404-1410
N Madison Ave aka Fairmont Sub, Blk G, Lots 6 & 7, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November,
1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -a copy of the file of record,
it is evident that there exists the excessive growth or accumulation of weeds, undergrowth or other similar plant materials at the above address.
The Conclusions of Law are: Richard S. Truesdale is in violation of Section 95.04.
It is the Order of this Board that Richard Truesdale shall comply with Section 95.04 of the Code of the City of Clearwater within 10 days (11/24/90). Upon failure to comply within
the time specified, the City Manager may authorize the entry upon the property and such action as is necessary to remedy the condition, without further notice to Richard Truesdale.
The City Commission may then adopt a Resolution assessing against the property on which remedial action was taken by the City the actual cost incurred plus $150.00 administrative cost.
Such cost shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. A Notice of Lien, in such form as the City Commission shall determine, may be recorded in the Public Records of Pinellas
County as other liens are recorded. If the owner takes remedial action after the time specified, the City Commission may assess the property the $150.00 administrative cost. Such cost
shall constitute a lien against the property until paid. Upon complying, Richard Truesdale shall notify Geri Doherty, the City Official who shall inspect the property and notify the
Board of compliance. Should a dispute arise concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
Case No. 41-90 On Top Of The World Condominium Assoc. Inc.
Bldgs. 18, 18A, 34, 36, 37, 40, 42, 44, 45, 50,
53-61, 74, 80, 83, 84, 87, 88 & 89
(Fire Code) Cont. from 10/24/90
Mr. Cardinal moved to withdraw Case No. 41-90 at the request of the Fire Marshal. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Case No. 43-90 J.B.M. Entertainment of Countryside, Inc.
d/b/a Baby Dolls
3006 Gulf to Bay Blvd
(Land Development Code)
No one was present to represent the violator.
Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, stated she received at least two complaints
regarding signs at this address. On August 9th she spoke with the manager and requested compliance. She saw the sign displayed again on August 26th and 30th and issued a notice of
violation with compliance due by September 13th. Ms. Doherty stated the sign was there again September 13th, 25th and 28th. She inspected the property today and the sign was on the
side of the building, which she photographed. The sign is placed in the street right of way at night. City Code allows one freestanding sign per property, and does not allow placement
in the right of way. The business already has a freestanding sign. City submitted exhibit A, a photograph of the sign and site where displayed.
In response to questions, Ms. Doherty stated she doesn't feel the sign is illegal where it is stored as it is not prominently visible. She stated the average length of time given for
removal of an illegal sign is two days for verbal notice; written notice allows an extra two to three days. She stated the time frame could vary from place to place as some people
are informed of the violation repeatedly.
Mr. Aude moved that concerning Case No. 43-90 regarding violation of Sections 134.009(2) and 134.017(a)(1) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 3006 Gulf-to-Bay Blvd.
a/k/a Bay View City Sub., Blk. 8, Lots 8, 9 & 10, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November,
1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Geri Doherty, Code Inspector, and viewing the evidence, exhibits submitted: City composite exhibit A -photographs of the property,
it is evident that J.B.M. Entertainment of Countryside has displayed an illegal sign without a permit and in the street right of way, that this condition was corrected and recurred.
It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing.
The Conclusions of Law are: J.B.M. Entertainment of Countryside Inc. was in violation of Sections 134.009(2) and 134.017 (a)(1).
It is the Order of this Board that J.B.M. Entertainment of Countryside Inc. shall comply with Sections 134.009(2) and 134.017(a)(1) of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If J.B.M.
Entertainment of Countryside Inc. repeats the violation, the Board may order them to pay a fine of $200.00 per day for each day the violation exists after J.B.M. Entertainment of Countryside
Inc. is notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur, the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Should a dispute arise
concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board order resulting from
a Public Hearing. A Petition for Rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the order and prior to the filing
of any appeal. Upon receipt of the Petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining
whether to grant the Petition to Reconsider or Rehear. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
Case No. 44-90 Larry Dimmit Jr. d/b/a Larry Dimmit Cadillac Inc.
25191 US 19 North
(Land Development Code)
The Inspector requested this case be withdrawn.
Mr. Cardinal moved to withdraw Case No. 44-90. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Case No. 45-90 Budget Car Sales South
18940 US 19 North
(Land Development Code)
Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated he first inspected the property in May and noticed balloons tied to the fence and cars. He notified the business of the violation and told them to
remove the balloons by 3 PM that day, and they did comply. On Saturday, October 6th, he inspected the property and balloons were tied to the cars, which he photographed.
In response to questions, Mr. Rosa stated the business was cited in May for the violation, but he did not issue a notice in October.
Discussion ensued regarding why no citation was issued in October and why the case wasn't brought to the Board in May. It was stated the Inspector needs to be more prudent with evidence
in bringing cases to the Board.
Mr. Wyatt moved that concerning Case No. 45-90 regarding violation of Section 134.009(5) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 18940 US 19 N aka Parcel No. 19-26-16-00000-410-0500,
the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November, 1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal
Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, it is evident that a violation was cited at the referenced address in May, 1990; however, the case was
not brought before the Board at that time.
The Conclusions of Law are: the Municipal Code Enforcement Board does not wish to pursue the case at this time.
It is the Order of this Board that Case No. 45-90 shall be dismissed.
Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board order resulting from a Public Hearing. A Petition for Rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the
Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the order and prior to the filing of any appeal. Upon receipt of the Petition, the Board will consider whether or not
to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining whether to grant the Petition to Reconsider or Rehear. The motion was duly seconded.
Upon the vote being taken, Messrs. Wyatt, Aude, Cardinal, Murray, McKinney and Ms. Riley voted "aye." Mr. Zinzow voted "nay." Motion carried.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
Case No. 46-90 Domino's Pizza Inc.
2181 Drew St.
(Land Development Code)
Emanti Corey, Corporate Supervisor representing Domino's Pizza Inc., stated the violation did exist as cited.
Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, stated a complaint was received on September 17th regarding a banner at Drew Street and Belcher Road. Notice was sent September 21st via certified mail and
the signed receipt was returned. The property was re- inspected September 27th, the banner was still there and a photograph was taken. Mr. Rosa reinspected the property this morning
and the violation was corrected.
Mr. Corey stated Domino's has discontinued banner waving throughout the state. He stated it was a temporary promotional campaign which caused problems; and the company has taken measures
to be sure there are no more banners.
A question was raised regarding the need for an order; and the Assistant City Attorney stated an order is needed in case of a repeat of the violation in the future.
Mr. Cardinal moved that concerning Case No. 46-90 regarding violation of Section 134.009(5) of the Clearwater City Code on property located at 2181 Drew St aka M&B 11/01, Sec. 13/29/15,
the Municipal Code Enforcement Board has heard testimony at the Municipal Code Enforcement Board hearing held the 14th day of November, 1990, and based on the evidence, the Municipal
Code Enforcement Board enters the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order.
The Findings of Fact are: after hearing testimony of Rick Rosa, Code Inspector, and Mr. Corey, representing Domino's Pizza Inc., who admitted to it is evident that a banner was displayed
at 2181 Drew Street. It is further evident that the condition was corrected prior to this hearing.
The Conclusions of Law are: Domino's Pizza Inc. was in violation of Section 134.009(5).
It is the Order of this Board that Domino's Pizza Inc. shall comply with Section 134.009(5) of the Code of the City of Clearwater. If Domino's Pizza Inc. repeats the violation, the
Board may order them to pay a fine of $100.00 per day for each day the violation exists after Domino's Pizza Inc. is notified of the repeat violation. Should the violation reoccur,
the Board has the authority to impose the fine at that time without a subsequent hearing. Should a dispute arise
concerning compliance, either party may request a further hearing before the Board. Any aggrieved party may petition the Board to reconsider or rehear any Board order resulting from
a Public Hearing. A Petition for Rehearing must be made in writing and filed with the Board Secretary no later than thirty days after the execution of the order and prior to the filing
of any appeal. Upon receipt of the Petition, the Board will consider whether or not to reconsider or rehear the case. The Board will not hear oral argument or evidence in determining
whether to grant the Petition to Reconsider or Rehear. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
Done and Ordered this 14th day of November, 1990.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Affidavits of Compliance
Case No. 90-09-1-1 Michael Sarris
380 Elizabeth Ave aka M&B 13/2601, Sec 17-29-16
Case No. 90-09-1 #5 Roger C. Ravel & Ray Ulmer
vacant lot about 607 Jones St aka Jones Sub of
Nicholson's, Blk 6, Lots 7, 8 & part of Lot 6
Case No. 90-09-1 #6 Scott & Alicia Nicholas
vacant lot about 2993 Talon Dr aka
Eagle Estates, Lot 44
Case No. 90-09-1 #7 James R. Chambers
3280 Mulberry Dr aka Countryside Tract 5, Lot 62
Case No. 90-09-1 #8 Joseph & Miriam Jackson
1349 Overlea St aka Pinebrook Highlands, Blk E, Lot 3
Case No. 90-09-1 #9 Keith Bostrom & Terri Hejna
1340 Overlea St aka Pinebrook Highlands, Blk D, Lot 16
Case No. 90-09-2 #1 Ruby Clayton
about 1454 S Greenwood Ave aka M&B 32/13, Sec 22-29-15
Case No. 90-09-2 #3 George W & Sue Ely
about 1753 Pamelia Dr aka
Highland Estates 2nd Addn, Blk G, Lot 2
Case No. 90-09-2 #4 Scott T MacGregor
3183 Chamblee Lane aka Bordeaux Estates, Lot 1
Case No. 90-09-2 #5 Sung Bok & Bong Ja Bok
311 S Jupiter Ave aka Skycrest Unit A, Blk B, Lot 3
Case No. 90-10-1 #3 Keramat Fahari
about 906 Hart St aka
Park Plaza Sub, Blk E, Lots 9 & 10
Mr. Cardinal moved to accept the Affidavit of Compliance in Case Nos.
90-9-1-1, 90-9-1-5, 90-9-1-6, 90-9-1-7, 90-9-1-8, 90-9-1-9, 90-9-2-1, 90-9-2-3, 90-9-2-4, 90-9-2-5, 90-10-1-3. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously.
OTHER BOARD ACTION
A question was raised regarding property at 1871 McKinley Street and whether
the owner could be cited for a zoning violation for operating a junk business. John Richter, Development Code Manager, stated it would be difficult to obtain evidence to substantiate
such a violation.
In response to a question, it was stated the inspectors follow up on complaints received and from their own observations as time allows. It was stated the majority of the cases are
abated without coming to the Board.
Discussion ensued regarding enforcement of the code; and it was stated the code needs to be updated to efficiently deal with the violations. Concern was expressed that some violators
are circumventing the violations by complying and then repeating the violation over and over again.
NEW BUSINESS
John Richter stated a ticketing ordinance is being brought forward which will allow the inspectors to write citations with fines established for different classifications of violations.
He stated other cities have instituted similar ordinances; and the tickets would be used for clear cut violations such as signs and balloons. It was stated those violations which
the Board already ruled on will come back before the Board. Andy Salzman, Board Attorney, stated this will quicken the process for lot clearing violations; and a fine not paid will
go to court as a misdemeanor. In response to a question, it was stated the Inspector can decide whether to cite them, issue the ticket or just a warning. Concern was expressed that
the fines need to be increased to have deterrent power.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 4:44 p.m.