Laserfiche WebLink
~'. E.._~ s__: '. <br />( _ <br />~..., f '7 _. f ~~ ,,' <br />Parks ~ recreation Cornrnission <br /> <br />rare: Don Munson <br />ant: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:13 AEI <br />~ yR~/COl,dncil <br />o: Bill ~lalinen; dike Darrow <br />~~~: Response to questions concerning Code Enforcement <br />-~=-- <br />__L <br />~~ T <br />~iemo_ProblemCase <br />si0232007.dac ... <br />Council Members, <br />The following is a response to questions asked by Council Member Dan Rae concerning Code <br />Enforcement which is an agenda item at the October 22nd Council meeting: <br />Question 1.) Specifically, fallowing on Tammy's request, the information that I wauld <br />like us to have is the current total number of outstanding cases in that 50-100 "hard <br />case" category. Also, of thane, how many are less than 90 days old; how many are between <br />90 days and I year old; how many are between 1 and 2 years old; and how many are over 2 <br />years old? Also, of the cases reported on above, how many would have county court <br />citations issued immediately upon the change to allow staff to do so without coming to the <br />council? In addition, any generalized information as to the types of cases involved would <br />be helpful. <br />And I think Tammy specifically referenced getting a break-down as to repeat offenders <br />versus first-time offenders. <br />Response: <br />- The attached chart provides this information. <br />- Two sites (2967 Galtier and 2040-42 Brenner) would have court citations <br />issued. <br />- Keep in mind 'Days old' refers to the age of the most recent case, not <br />previous cases that were closed. <br />Question 2.) I was not necessarily convinced that taking the council out of the county <br />court citation process was a bad idea last year, but I am growing concerned over the <br />number of languishing cases that the public has brought to our attention over the last few <br />months, and I wonder whether coming to the council would be a benefit to the process <br />rather than a hindrance. If the cases come before us early enough, and we direct an <br />action, including court citation, does that not help the staff by giving them more force <br />of authority behind them (and take some of the pressure off of them as the "bad guy")? <br />Additionally, I like the notion of using some form of city abatement whenever possible <br />because it keeps the resolution of the matter under our positive control, including <br />timing, rather than leaving it up to the court system to deal with. Why even burden the <br />courts if we can deal with it ourselves? <br />Response: <br />- 'Bringing cases to Council earlier': Presently cases are brought to Council <br />after two requests and an Administrative Ticket that does not result in compliance. <br />Involving Council even earlier in the process would unnecessarily burden Council with many <br />more cases. As a way to inform the Council on code issues we are re-instituting the <br />monthly Land Use Update which will inform Council of those cases that are issued <br />administrative tickets. This way Council will be involved earlier in the process and will <br />be informed of cases where voluntary requests have been ignored, tickets issued and <br />council action a possibility. <br />- 'Using city abatement vs. burdening the courts': This is always an option <br />gut abatements are used infrequently (other than the accelerated process used for grass, <br />snow, vegetation, etc.) because they are very, very time consuming and the division does <br />not have enough staff to utilize this option. Abatements involve writing specs, contacting <br />