Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07171996COD,.E ENFORCEMENT BOARD ,.REGULAR MEETING JULY 17. 1996 Chairman Nicolini called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m. PRESENT: Mr. Neglia Mr. Generazio Ckmn. Nicolini Mr. May Mr. Cosco Mr. Goelz Mr. Costa Mr. Metcalf ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Valerie Settles, City Attorney Mr. Steven Lulich, Board Attorney Randy Bonar, Code Enforcement officer Ken Schmitt, Code Enforcement officer Dorri Bosworth, Secretary Ms. Settles was introduced to the Board. AnOtmC~.,~.~$: Chmn. Nicolini was asked to step down by the Board Attorney because his term had expired. Mr. Dave Costa, alternate member, would be voting in his place. The meeting was handed over to Vice Chairman Generazio. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None ~LD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSXN~,~: The respondents, code enforcement officers, and city attorney were sworn in by Mr. Lulich. CASE# 96-11406 - 642 BROMNXNG TERRACE - JACOB L. ~LOVER MS. Settles presented the Board a composite exhibit on behalf of the Code Enforcement Department consisting of copies of all notices and certificates of service to the respondent. CODE ENFORCEMENt. BOARD REGULAR ~E~TING OF JULY 17, 1996 The respondent, Jacob Glover, was not present. Ms. Settles called Randy Bonar to testify. He stated in 10/95 a pop-up-camper in the upright position was parked in the ROW. He spoke to Mr. Glover but, the camper was not removed within the time frame allotted. Mr. Glover was given a Notice of Violation on 11/28/95. The trailer was in compliance on 12/4/95. On 5/16/96 the camper was back in the ROW in the upright position. A summons was served to Mr. Glover. Mr. Glover called the office on 5/23/96 to verify that the camper was once again in compliance. A picture of the camper in violation was submitted to the Board as evidence. Mr. Generazio verified that the case was not a reoccurrence being brought before the Board a second time. Mr. Bonar stated no. Ms. Settles stated the historical pattern of non-compliance becomes relevant when the Board is considering a penalty. Mr. Neglia asked if a signed certified receipt was received from the respondent regarding the change of meeting dates? The secretary stated yes. Mr. Generazio asked if the respondent was aware he was still required to come to the meeting even if he was in compliance? Mr. Bonar stated it was made clear in the wording of the summons. Mr. Bonar stated the city's recommendation was to levy no fine but to find that the respondent was in violation for the record. Mr. Goelz questioned if the license and tag were in order? Mr. Bonar stated yes. Mr. Goelz asked if anyone was living in the trailer? Randy stated no, the trailer was for sale. The Board was given a proposed order prepared by the City for consideration. Mr. Metcalf made a motion that "we approve the Findings of Fact, the Conclusion of Law, and based upon those findings and conclusions, I move that if the respondent repeats or causes a reoccurrence of the violation this Board shall after notification to the respondent reconvene in the Council Chambers to hear further evidence on the issue of compliance and may impose a fine up to a maximum of $500.00 per day each day the violation occurs beyond the compliance date." Mr. Neglia seconded the motion. Roll call was taken. 7-0 motion carried. CODE ENFORCEmeNT BOARD REGUL~ MEETING OF. JULY 17, 1996 PAGE THREE C~SE #96-11508 - 225 PERIWINKLE DRXVE - BYRON SMITH Mr. Smith was present and stated his address as 225 Periwinkle Drive. Ms. Settles called Randy Bonar to testify. He stated on 1/10/96 he found a horse trailer in the driveway of Mr. Byron house. Mr. Bonar left a door hangar explaining the code. On 1/15 the trailer was removed, on 3/18/96 the trailer was back in the driveway and on 3/25/96 a Notice of Violation was served. The next day the trailer was relocated. On June 7, 1996 the trailer was out in the ROW for three days. On June 10th the trailer was once again removed. On 6/20/96 a pop-up camper was located in the driveway. The section of the code that Mr. Smith had been cited for and given a copy of previously also applied to campers. Mr. Bonar felt a summons being served was warranted. Mr. Generazio asked if the camper was upright? Randy stated no. Randy further stated when Mr. Smith contacted him, he claimed he was unaware the camper could not be in the driveway and immediately relocated it. Ms. Settles submitted three photographs as evidence which, were first verified by the respondent. She also presented a composite exhibit of copies of all notices and certificates of service sent to the respondent. Mr. Smith explained the camper had just been purchased without any tags and he was apprehensive about storing it anywhere without them. After he received the summons he removed the camper immediately. He stated he was not aware of the code when he bought the horse trailer and received the first notice. They were repairing the floor of the trailer when they received the second notice, and the third time the trailer was there for only a day after a horse show. Mr. Generazio asked Mr. Smith if he didn't realize the code he was given for the horse trailer was the same for the camper? Mr. Smith stated no. Mr. May asked Mr. Smith if he had deliberately stored the trailers in the wrong location? Mr. Smith stated no, they were in the process of selling the house and had no intentions of permanently keeping either of the trailers on the property. Mr. Bonar stated the City's recommendation was to levy no fine but to find that the respondent was in non-compliance. Mr. Costa asked the respondent if there was an area on the side of the house that he could properly store the trailers? Mr. Smith stated no, there was a gate on the side which would make in impossible to get to the back yard. CODE ~NFORCEME~T BOARD REGULAR MEETING 0.~ JULY 17, 1996 Mr. Neglia made a motion that "we accept the City's recommendation that this gentleman would be, that it will be written down that he's been in violation, and if it should occur again, then we'll do the necessary violation fines or what not. But I would like to go along with the City's recommendation." Mr. Goelz seconded the motion. Roll call was taken. 7-0 motion carried. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL -REGULARMEMBER, GENERAL CONTRACTOR POSITION - TERM TO EXPIRE 6/99 One application was received, and the applicant, Mr. Michael Oliver, introduced himself and stated his address as 106 Lancaster Street, Sebastian. Mr. Oliver was interviewed by the Board. Mr. Metcalf made a motion "that we recommend to the City Council that Michael Oliver, Sr. be accepted as member of the Code Enforcement Board". Mr. May seconded the motion. Mr. Metcalf amended the motion to include that it was for the full-time contractor's position. Mr. May seconded the amendment. Roll call was taken. Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Mr. Costa YES Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Goelz YES Mr. Neglia YES Motion carried 7-0. ATTORNEY'S M~TTERS: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE PROCEDURE CHANGES Mr. Generazio stated changes should be made regarding acceptance of applications, especially after the recent situation involving the Planning and Zoning Commission. He questioned if a position still had to be advertised to the public if the Board was going to recommend to City Council reappointment of the current member, if eligible. He felt it was insulting to an applicant to have to go through the formal procedures only to be turned down because the decision had been made before they got before the Board. Mr. Lulich stated he didn't feel the Board could make policy changes but had the right to make a recommendation to City Council. He reviewed the history of the Board's past and current philosophy on filling vacant positions. He suggested the Board could make a CODE....~FORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR ~ETING OF JULY 1.7,.....1996 PAGE FIVE recommendation to City Council not to advertise for a position they knew they wanted to reappoint when it came close for the term to expire. Ms. Settles stated there was a Resolution, not an ordinance, passed by City Council stating all expired terms had to be advertised for applicants. Mr. Lulich again stated that City Council is the body that appoints. The only thing Code Enforcement Board could do is make a recommendation. If City Council wanted to publish and advertise and interview, they can appoint whoever they want. The benefit of the Board interviewing is that there would not be any surprises on who the City Council appoints. Mr. Neglia stated he would like to see the Resolution changed or worded that the City MUST interview all applicants. Mr. Generazio noted that Mr. Michael Oliver, had come to the meeting on his own time for a voluntary position. Mr. Generazio felt the current alternate member, Mr. Dave Costa, should move up to the regular member position, and the new member should come in as an alternate. Ms. Settles suggested the Board direct City Council to look into that procedural change. Mr. Metcalf stated this was his last meeting as his term expired in August and pointed out that there were now two openings on the Board. He suggested the alternate (Mr. Costa). move into his position (engineering), and Mr. Oliver move into the contractor position. Mr. Generazio questioned if there would be a problem with Mr. Costa moving into the engineer's position without any engineering experience? Mr. Lulich stated the Board can make any motion and recommendation to the City Council and explain its reasons for that recommendation. Mr. Metcalf stated he wanted to change his motion "to recommend to the City Council they appoint, move Mr. Costa into Mr. Nicolini's job (general contractor position), and move Mr. Oliver in as alternate, no, into my job (engineering position). Then there will be two regular members. Then we'll still need an alternate." Mr. Generazio noted that a vote had already been taken on filling the expired position. Ms. Settles stated Robert's Rules allowed a motion for reconsideration. Mr. Metcalf made a motion to reconsider. Mr. Neglia seconded the motion. Mr. Lulich called for a raising of hands to show a majority of approval. CODE ENFQR~EMENT BOARD R~GULAR MEETING OF JU~Y 17, 1996 PAGE SIX The secretary informed the Board that recently a formal advertisement for the engineer's position was sent out and had a deadline date. Mr. Generazio suggested that Mr. Oliver remain in the contractor's position and Mr. Costa be moved into Mr. Metcalf's position and recommend the secretary to advertise for an alternate position. Mr. Goelz questioned what happened if an engineer submitted an application? Mr. May questioned why the Board was set up with different positions. It was explained it was an Ordinance, Section 2 of the Code of Ordinances. The secretary questioned if the current motion was brought to City Council and approved, what would happen if applications were received for the engineer's position? Mr. Lulich stated he didn't think there would be a problem in making a recommendation for a position that would become available in 30 days be filled by a certain person. Ms. Settles stated the Resolution was very specific on advertisements for positions. City Council would have to pass a resolution stating that it did not apply to Code Enforcement and make separate rules for them. Mr. Lulich stated if procedures were followed, alternate members should submit an application for a permanent position as they come available and be interviewed like all other applicants. Mr. Metcalf made a motion "that we recommend to the City Council that 2 regular positions be appointed, Mr. Oliver and Mr. Costa, and to advertise for an alternate. And the engineer can come as alternate." Mr. May seconded the motion. Mr. Neglia noted City Council would have to change the resolution to accept the recommendation. Ms. Settles suggested making two separate motions, one recommending Mr. Oliver, the other stating the alternate will move up to Mr. Metcalf's position. This would make it possible for City Council to go with one or the other, or both. Mr. Metcalf changed "my motion to go with the City Attorney". Mr. Goelz seconded the change. Mr. Lulich asked Mr. Metcalf if he wanted to re-instate the motion that was reconsidered? Mr. Metcalf stated "Yes, i want to reinstate the motion as suggested by the city attorney". Mr. Goelz seconded the motion. CODE ENFORCEMENT.BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF J.ULY 17, 1996 PAGE SEVEN Roll call was taken: Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Goelz YES Mr. Neglia YES Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Mr. Costa YES Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Neglia made a motion "that we recommend to the City Council that Mr. Costa move into the regular position Mr. Metcalf is emptying and then advertise for an alternate position which will become vacant once Mr. Costa is moved up." Mr. Cosco seconded the motion. Roll call was taken: Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Goelz NO Mr. Neglia YES Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Mr. Costa YES Motion carried 6-1. Ms. Settles suggested that "the Board recommend to the City Council that they change their interview policy for Code Enforcement to provide that whenever there is a vacancy that the alternate member may move up at the discretion of the Board and the City Council without having the advertising and interview requirements, this exception only for Code Enforcement". Mr. Metcalf so moved. Mr. Neglia seconded the motion. Roll call was taken: Mr. Costa YES Mr. Generazio YES Mr. Goelz NO Mr. Neglia YES Mr. Metcalf YES Mr. Cosco YES Mr. May YES Motion carried 6-1. ~0ARD ATTORNE~,.,.,RE~UESTS AND.,REPORTS~ Mr. Lulich requested a new Chairman and Vice Chairman be elected. Nominations were taken: C,QQ~ ENFORCEMENT ,~OARD REGULAR ~.~.TING OF JULY 17,...~996 PAGE EIGHT Mr. Neglia nominated Mr. Generazio for Chairman. seconded the nomination. Mr. Goelz Mr. Metcalf nominated Mr. May for Chairman. Mr. May declined. A vote was taken. Ail members were in favor, Mr. Generazio became the new Chairman and resigned as Vice Chairman. Mr. Generazio/Metcalf nominated Mr. May. Mr. Goelz nominated Mr. Neglia. Roll call was taken: Mr. Goelz NEGLIA Mr. Neglia NEGLiA Mr. Metcalf MAY Mr. Cosco NEGLIA Mr. May Abstained Mr. Costa Abstained Mr. Generazio MAY 3-2, vote in favor of Mr. Neglia. Mr. Neglia became the new Vice Chairman. BUILDIN~FFICIAL'S M&TTER~: None The Board discussed the copies of the Code Enforcement officer's Weekend Logs they received in their packets. The secretary informed them they were given the copies for informational purposes only. Mr. Lulich stated because the report contained information on actual cases which had the potential to be brought before the Board, it was advised not to receive the report as to avoid any conflict of interest. None AD~OU~m:NT: Chairman Generazio adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m. Minutes approved at the Dorri Bo~worth, Secretary Code Enforcement Board 1996 meeting. irman