HomeMy WebLinkAbout12181991 COD.__~_E~BOARD
REGULAR HEETING
DECEMBER 18~ 199__1 - 2~_~.~ P.M.___.
MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS AT 2~O5
P.M.
ROLL CALL .-
PRESENT
HR. TOZZOLO
CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS
MR. NICOLINI
MRS. KOSTENBADER
MR. GILLIAMS
ATTORNEY LULICH
EXCUSED=
MR. METCALF
VICE CHAIRMAN FISCHER
BRUCE COOPER, BUILDING OFFICIAL
ALSO PRESENTi
ROBERT NICHOLSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERs
RICHARD TORPY. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVAL. OF MINU. TES:
MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. GILLIAMS, SECONDED BY MRS. KOSTENBADER
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 20, 1991.
CARRIED.
AT. TORNKY'S MATTEREd. NONE
OLD BUSINESS:
MR. NICOLINI WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS
THE FINES ON THE MONTHLY REPORT. SOME OF THEM ARE
OUTSTANDING FOR MORE THAN 2 YEARS. CHAIRMAN DEROBERTIS
SUGGESTED THAT A LETTER BE SENT TO THE VIOLATORS STIPULATING
THAT THEIR FINE IS OUTSTANDING AND THEN THE BOARD WOULD ACT
ON IT AT A LATER TIME. MR. NICOLINI ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THE
LETTER SHOULD HAVE THE DATE, THE OFFENSE AND THE FINE AND
GIVE 30 DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF THE LETTER TO PAY THE FINE. IF
THE FINE IS NOT PLACED, A LIEN WILL BE PLACED ON THE
INDIVIDUAL.
ATTORNEY LULICH STATED THE BOARD BRINGS THE CASE BEFORE IT
AND DETERMINES IT TO BE CERTIFIED AS A LIEN AND RECORDED BY
THE CITY ATTORNEY OR STAFF AND A COPY OF IT WOULD BE SENT TO
THE OWNER.
COD____~E ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 18, 1991
PAGE 2
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY STATED THE BOARD COULD MAKE AN ORDER
THAT A LIEN BE RECORDED BUT AS FAR AS ANY FURTHER COLLECTION
EFFORTS FROM THAT POINT, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY TO DO
THAT NOT THE BOARD.
ATTORNEY LULICH STATED THAT IN THE PAST 4 YEARS THE BOARD HAD
A RESOLUTION OF THE MATTER, A DETERMINATION WAS MADE AND THEN
AN ORDER WAS CREATED AND SIGNED BY THE CHAIRMAN. BASICALLY,
THERE WOULD BE FINDING OF FACTS, PENALTY IF THERE IS SUCH AND
THEN THE BOARD WOULD LET THE FINE ACCUMULATE OR AFTER A
PERIOD OF TIME, THE BOARD WOULD ASK TO HAVE THE ORDER
RECORDED AS A LIEN.
ATTORNEY LULICH ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
TOOK ISSUE WITH THE BOARD ATTORNEY WITH RECORDING THE LIENS.
BASICALLY SAYING IT IS THE CITY'S POSITION TO COLLECT AND
BECAUSE OF IT THE CITY SHOULD BE THE ONE TO FILE THE LIEN.
THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY STATED THAT THEY WILL NOT BE
RECORDING THE LIENS BUT STAFF WILL.
THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY STATED THAT THE CiTY WILL BRING
BACK CASES TO THE BOARD THAT THEY WANT CERTIFIED AS A LIEN.
THE BOARD SHOULD ISSUE AN ORDER AND IF THE VIOLATOR IS NOT IN
COMPLIANCE AND THE CITY WANTS THE FINE CERTIFIED SO THEY CAN
PLACE A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY, THE CITY THEN NEEDS TO BRING
THE CASE BACK BEFORE THE BOARD AGAIN.
THE BOARD REQUESTED THE BOARD ATTORNEY TO LOOK INTO IMPOSING
A PERCENTAGE OF INTEREST ON THE FINES. THIS WOULD BE BETTER
FOR FLAT FINES AND WOULD GIVE SOME INCENTIVE TO PAY THE FINE.
NEW BUSINESS=
CASE # 91-5923
JOHN D. & SHIRLEY FENNO
ATTORNEY LULICH SWORE IN ROBERT NICHOLSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER. MR. & MRS. FENNO WERE NOT PRESENT.
MR. NICMOLSON STATED THAT ONE R.V. WAS PARKED IN FRONT OF THE
FRONT BUILDING LINE AT THE RESIDENCE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION
20A-5.16. THEY WERE GIVEN A VIOLATION NOTICE AT 10/22/91 AT
O915 HOURS AND GIVEN 3 HOURS TO REMOVE THE VEHICLE. A
RECHECK AT 1550 HOURS SAME DATE AND VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN
REMOVED AND THE CASE WAS ORDERED TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE
BOARD. THE REASON 3 HOURS WAS GIVEN TO COMPLY WAS BECAUSE
CODE ~ORCEMENT BOARD - REGULAR HEETING - DECEMBER 18, 1991
PAGE 3
THIS WAS A REPEAT VIOLATION. THE ALLEGED VIOLATORS WOULD NOT
ACCEPT LETTERS SO THEY WERE HANDED A VIOLATION NOTICE. THEY
DID NOT REMOVE THE VEHICLE AND THEREFORE WAS BROUGHT BEFORE
THE BOARD. THE VEHICLE WAS THERE 2 TO 3 DAYS AFTER THE 3
HOURS GIVEN TO COMPLY. SINCE THEN IT HAS BEEN THERE AND
GONE. ON 10/30/91 THEY HAD MOVED THE VEHICLE TO A NEIGHBORS
PROPERTY ON MIDVALE TERRACE AND PARKED IT IN THEIR DRIVEWAY.
SHORTLY AFTER THAT, THE VEHICLE WAS GONE AND MAY BE ON THE
ROAD NOW. MR. NICHOLSON STATED THEY ALWAYS HAD A REASON FOR
THE R.V. TO BE IN THE DRIVEWAY. PHOTO GIVEN AS EVIDENCE TO
THE BOARD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT JOHN & SHIRLEY FENNO BE FOUND IN
VIOLATION & A FLAT FINE OF $100.OO BE IMPOSED.
MR. GILLIAMS ASKED IF MR. OR MRS. FENNO SENT NOTICE THAT THEY
COULD NOT MAKE IT TODAY. GERRY KUBES, BOARD SECRETARY,
TALKED TO MR. FENNO SHORTLY AFTER HE RECEIVED HIS NOTICE OF
HEARING. HE STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE THE
MEETING SINCE HE WOULD BE FURTHER SOUTH BECAUSE OF A
RELATIVE. THE BOARD SECRETARY TOLD HIM HE SHOULD BE AT THE
MEETING TO DEFEND HIMSELF.
BASED ON THIS PHONE CALL, THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD TABLE THEIR VOTE AND GIVE THE
ALLEGED VIOLATORS NOTICE AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THE
NEXT MEETING.
MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. GILLIAMS, SECONDED BY MR. TOZZOLO TO
BRING BACK CASE #91-5923 AS OLD BUSINESS TO THE JANUARY
MEETING SO THAT MR. a MRS. FENNO WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
APPEAR AND PRESENT THEIR CASE.
CARRIED.
BOARD ATTORNEY REOUESTS AND REPORTSl NONE
BUILDING OFFICIAL'S MATTERS, NONE
G__ENERAL DISCUSSI.0~.~. NONE
PUBLIC INPUT: NONE
ADJOURN,
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. NICOLINI, SECONDED BY MR. GILLIAMS
TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 3,00 P.M.
CARRIED.
199~
Meeting.
Minutes approved at the~~ ,
Donato Derobertis. Chairman