Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01171996CQpE ENFORCEMENT REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 17, 1996 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gilliams at 2:03 p.m. ROLL CaLL: PRESENT: Chairman Gilliams Mr. Nicolini Mr. Goelz Mr. Metcalf Mr. Generazio Mr. Cosco EXCUSED: Mr. May Mr. Neglia ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Steven Lulich, Board Attorney Mr. Tim Williams, Asst. City Attorney Randy Bonar, Code Enforcement officer Dorri Bosworth, Secretary ANNOUNCF. J~NTS: Mr. Ken Cosco, alternate member, is voting in place of Mr. Mack May, who was excused and absent from the meeting. Chmn. Gilliams announced his term was expiring in 3/96 and he was not eligible for reappointment. The Board requested the secretary to put on the next agenda election of chairman and vice chairman for the new year. APPROVAL OF ~ZNUTES: None a~RE~z'$ ~XT~RS: None 0ID B~SXN~SS: None NEW BU~,~NESS: CASE #95-10607 - DEBRAWOODS & MILDRED FIGG - 201 CLUB COURT Ail persons testifying were sworn in by the Board Attorney. Mr. George Preston Figg of 637 Carnival Terrace, Sebastian, was representing Ms. Mildred Figg. CODE ENFOrCeMENT BOARD REG~LARMEETING OF JANUARY 17, 1996 PAGE TWO Mr. williams questioned the Code Enforcement Officer, Randy Bonar, regarding his involvement with this case. Mr. Bonar stated on 11/16/95 he visited 201 Club Court regarding 2 vehicles that were unlicensed sitting in the driveway. He spoke verbally to the residents and left a door hangar regarding the violation. (Section 98-36(c)). He issued a Notice of Violation on 11/27/95 giving the residents 30 days to have the vehicles removed or properly tagged. By January 2, 1996, one car was removed. As of today, the blue Datsun still remained in violation. A summons to appear before the Code Enforcement Board was delivered to Debra Woods on 1/4/96. Mr. Figg explained the blue Datsun belonged to Mildred Figg's grandson. They could not get a hold of the title, and most towing companies would not move the car without a title. Chmn. Gilliams verified that the grandson was the owner of the car and that Mr. Figg's wife, Mildred Figg, and granddaughter, Debra Woods, were the owners of the property. Mr. Figg stated that was correct, and that the grandson lived at 637 Carnival Terrace and refused to move the car. Mr. Williams stated before the meeting he had a conversation with Mr. Figg, who indicated he felt they could remove the car but needed an additional 10 days. The City felt this was OK. Mr. Nicolini asked if the owner of the vehicle should have been present? Mr. Williams stated the owners of the property were responsible. Chmn. Gilliams asked Mr. Figg how he planned to get the car removed? Mr. Figg stated he was not sure how without the title. Mr. Generazio stated he thought you needed the title only if you were going to junk the car. He suggested the Police Department could offer some assistance, possibly waivering the need for the title. The Board then reviewed and discussed the proposed Order suggested by the City. 10 days was agreed to be "business days" which gave the Respondents till January31st to come into compliance. If they did not, a $100.00 fine would be issued. The Attorneys worked through additional changes that needed to be made. Mr. Generazio made a motion to accept the Order proposed by the City with the changes the Board Attorney read. Mr. Goelz seconded the motion. Roll call was taken: Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Cosco YES Chmn. Gilliams YES Mr. Nicolini YES Mr. Goelz YES Motion carried 6-0. cODE,,ENFORCEM~NT BOARD R~GUL~R MEETING OF JANUARY 17,, 1996 CASE $95-10157 - SKIP GRAY - 450 TULIP DRIVE Mr. Gray was not present at the hearing. Mr. Williams stated Mr. Gray was now in compliance and asked that he be found in violation in case any future violations reoccur. The proposed Order was given to the Board. Mr. Nicolini asked Mr. Bonar how many times did he have to go out to Mr. Gray's residence? Mr. Bonar stated he did not have the exact figure from the file with him but noted this case had been ongoing from the previous Code Enforcement officer who finished in October. Mr. Nicolini stated his concern was that after all the time spent trying to get violators to comply, only after a summons to appear before the Board is served is there any action from them. Mr. Generazio asked when the Respondent came into compliance? M~. Bonar stated 1/5/96. The case had begun in March of 1995. Mr. Williams presented the case to the Board. Mr. Bonar stated he investigated the property at 450 Tulip Drive which had an inoperable Ford pick-up truck on it. He served a Notice of Violation to the tenant, Mr. Skip Gray. The property was now in compliance. Mr. Goelz asked if the truck was parked on his property or the vacant lot adjacent to his? Mr. Bonar stated when he first addressed the case he saw it as being on Mr. Gray's property. During the case, it was moved over a bit, putting it onto the adjacent lot. There was no Unity of Title. The Board Attorney examined the proposed Order and reviewed suggested changes with the City Attorney. Mr. Williams stated the maximum amount of fine that can be enforced by Section (h) of the ordinance was a one-time $100.00 fine, not per day, as stated in the proposed Order. He went on to explain that it was the intention of the new parking ordinance (Section 98-36) not to have code enforcement enforcing parking violations, but to ideally have a Civil Enforcement Board handle these type of cases. The Police Department would be in charge of ticketing the vehicles. The Board discussed changing the proposed Order to read "a $100.00 fine, eliminating the ,,per day" clause. Mr. Generazio asked if there was no time limit the violator could stay in violation. Mr. williams stated no, the violator would be subject to successive code enforcement actions. Once the Civil Enforcement Board is set up, the violator could get a ticket every day, accumulating fines each day the violation remained. Mr. Generazio stated until that Board was activated, he did not like to see the Code Enforcement CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING Q.F.... JANUARY 17, 1996 PAGE FOUR Officer have to go out to the site so many times. He would like to see the Order remain "$100.00 per day" to eliminate Randy having to go out every day and issue another summons. Mr. Lulich stated the Order can not be drafted to go against the existing parking ordinance. Mr. Generazio made a motion to accept the proposed Order as written with the changes as discussed. Mr. Metcalf seconded the motion. Roll call was taken: Mr. Goelz YES Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Cosco YES Chmn. Gilliams YES Mr. Nicolini YES Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Lulich requested that the previous case (95-10607 Woods/Figg) be re-opened to amend the Order to eliminate the "per day" also. Mr. Williams re-opened the case, and Mr. Generazio agreed to amend his motion. Mr. Goelz seconded the change. Roll call was taken. 6-0 motion carried. BOARD,,,~TTORNE~ REOUESTS AND ItEPORTS: Mr. Lulich requested that the specific ordinance or code being violated be noted in the Summons to Appear before the Code Enforcement Board, which is not being done at the time. The Board Secretary so noted the request. BVILDING OFFICIAL MATTERS: None. Mr. Lulich asked the City Attorney why the Police Department wasn't handling the parking violations until the Civil Board is set up, why Code Enforcement? Mr. Williams stated that if the Police Department issued a ticket for municipal violations, it would have to be handled through the County Court, who would in turn charge the City to hear cases. A Florida Statute allows the municipality to set up its own Administrative Board to handle traffic violations. Mr. Generazio noted that the philosophy of the Code Enforcement Board was to have the violation cleaned-up, not just issue tickets and collect fines. Mr. Lulich also brought up that code enforcement addressed property owners. These parking tickets would go to the vehicle owner. CODE ENFORCEMENT.BOARD REG~LARMEETING OF JANUARY 17, 1996 PAGE FIV~ Mr. Generazio stated he felt Code Enforcement should deal with the vehicle owner and not the property owner in these type of cases. He noted Ms. Figg and Ms. Wood had other violations that they took care of right away. The car did not belong to them. Mr. Williams stated that without the testimony of the property owner, the owner of the vehicle would not have been known since it was not tagged. Mr. Williams stated he would discuss this matter with the City Manager to find out the status of setting up the Civil Administrative Board. Mr. Goelz questioned the attorneys if Board members were allowed to visit the property of the cases being brought before them, as in a quasi-judicial matter? Mr. Williams stated a Florida Statute allowed for site visitations, have exparte communications, and hire an expert to investigate but, it must be described and made part of the record at the meeting. Mr. Lulich stated he felt the Board was quasi-judicial versus administrative and all members should be presented evidence at the same time, keeping the impartiality of the hearing. The Board members can, during a hearing, request to reconvene at the site if they wish to visit the site all at the same time. if the Board requested, he would get an opinion from the Attorney General regarding this matter. If a Board member made the original complaint, he should abstain from voting. Chmn. Gilliams stated elections of chairman and vice chairman would be held at the next meeting. PUBLIC INPUT: None ADJOU~NT~ Mr. Generazio made a motion to adjourn the meeting. seconded the motion. Chairman Gilliams adjourned the meeting at 2:58 p.m. Mr. Goelz Minutes approved at the Code Enforcement Board Secretary