# Quick Poll on Code Enforcement



## Alias (Dec 13, 2011)

I am charged with Code Enforcement as well as a myriad of other duties.

I have a quick poll for you in reference to Code Enforcement and who is involved in the decision making.

When dealing with ramshackle residential structures, who makes the decision as to which one is the priority for a Code Enfocrement action?  Is it:

1. Building & Safety (BO or designee)

2. Committee of staff - BO, PW Director, FM

3. City Council/Board of Supervisors

Thanks for your input.


----------



## BSSTG (Dec 13, 2011)

Greetings,

Building official in the last 3 jursidictions I've worked in.

BS


----------



## north star (Dec 13, 2011)

*& & & &*

Alias,

IMO, initially the "powers that be" must give you their blessings

to proceed with each case...... Once you, or any formed committees,

has the guidance and direction necessary to act; including your

legal dept. / counsel, then the designated part(ies) can act.

Put another way, ...your elected officials have to establish a

hierarchy [ "chain of command" ] first and then officialy give

authority to form subsequent committees to act [ with their

authority ] on each case.

I'm thinking that us code officials are one tool in the elected

officials bag of authority.

Hope this makes sense!   

*& & & &*


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 13, 2011)

Agree with North Star. We do not look for "ramshackle" buildings nor do we initiate an inspection, They are complaint driven or as requested by the city manager,

As i explain to the "powers to be" and legal agrees when a jurisdiction starts down that path they better be willing to follow through to a conclusion. Eviction of tenants, securing or demolishing a building and all the other requirements that maybe involved. Abatement of hazardous materials would be one concern.

One of the main reasons we will not adopt a property maintenance code.

When you adopt a code you are responsible to enforce that code


----------



## fatboy (Dec 13, 2011)

Building Official here.......(me) But similar to MT, strictly complaint driven. We have adopted the IPMC.


----------



## Alias (Dec 13, 2011)

As Paul Harvey would say, and now the rest of the story.........

We have adopted the 2009 IPMC.

City Council has charged me with handling nuisance abatements and code enforcement in matters concerning buildings.  FM deals with the weed abatement.

I  have forms and have posted three properties this past Friday.  I have  received numerous complaints on these properties over several years. I have sent Notices  in past years to two of the three.  The third was condemned by  Environmental Health earlier this year.  I have Noticed them for lack of  maintenance.  All are vacant, two are unsecured, and 1 has a huge hole  in the roof (boarded up).

Now the FM wants to form a committee  to prioritize which property should be abated first.  Am I wrong in  feeling that he is trying to usurp my authority?  Am I wrong in not forming  a committee?

His main beef ( I think) was the house with the hole in the roof.  It belongs to his brother's (the councilman) boss/coworker.

There  are two more that are condemned and need to be noticed.  One is not a  problem and is up for tax sale in 2 years if no one pays the current  property taxes.  The last one is a major health hazard and will need to  be cleaned up using HAZMAT techniques.  I am not kidding you, it is that  bad.  I have prioritized them to the bottom of the list because they  will need more extensive clean-up than I think the City has funds for.

Comments?


----------



## gbhammer (Dec 13, 2011)

The BO makes the call usually on the advice of the inspectors and it is based on whether or not there is a blatant life safety violation or if there is long history of inaction by the property owner when it comes to correction of posted violations. In the first case we have no choice but to deny occupancy, in the second case we ticket with fines that could be as high as $1,000 a day.


----------



## gbhammer (Dec 13, 2011)

Pretty much just like mt.


----------



## RJJ (Dec 13, 2011)

I am on the same page as the above. I don't like enforcing the IPMC, but have to in some of my AHJ's.


----------



## north star (Dec 13, 2011)

** * * **

Alias,

In reading your "The Rest of The Story" comments, it sounds as

though the FM is trying to weazel in on your authority [ of course

I am making this statement from afar you realize ].

Has your city council established a formal hierarchy, with the

relevant department heads having a defined roll in the

process?.....If they have, and the FM is not in that hierarchy,

then politely state the established hierarchy, that your

elected officials have established and that you are simply

following their directives.....If the FM does not want to

adhere to the established hierarchy, then refer him to the

elected official over him / her for guidance.......If your

elected officials want the FM to run the whole show,

that would be even better for you......Let them deal

with everything!

Who is actually in charge of the whole process here?

*& & & &*


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 13, 2011)

> I have prioritized them to the bottom of the list because they will need more extensive clean-up than I think the City has funds for.


First you should have a budget to work within.

Second the budget although a consideration is not the sole reason for prioitizing your work

The properties that present the most hazardeous conditions with regards to the neighborhood. An abandoned unsecured building located close to a school for example or one that is being used as a crack house. Some actions would just requirer boarding the building or install a security fence around the property.

As for the FM is concerned

103.1 General.

The department of property maintenance inspection is hereby created and the executive official in charge thereof shall be known as the code official.

103.2 Appointment.

The code official shall be appointed by the chief appointing authority of the jurisdiction.

I believe that is you and if you want a committee you can ask for one.


----------



## Alias (Dec 13, 2011)

north star said:
			
		

> ** * * **Alias,
> 
> In reading your "The Rest of The Story" comments, it sounds as
> 
> ...


north star -

The hierarchy is that my boss is the Director of Public Works.  The Fire Department is a separate department.

In Chapter 5 of the City Code, it states that I am responsible for buildings and enforcing the IPMC.

You are correct, I have the distinct feeling that the FM is trying to weasel in on my dept.  The only reason I can think of is because his brother is on council and I went after the co-worker/boss.  He has stated that the FD doesn't have the budget to be burning down a bunch of houses.  I have never asked them to assist with abatements in the past, and I don't feel that burning down anything is the solution for compliance.  It is just a very weird comment and hence situation in my opinion.


----------



## Alias (Dec 13, 2011)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> First you should have a budget to work within.Second the budget although a consideration is not the sole reason for prioitizing your work
> 
> The properties that present the most hazardeous conditions with regards to the neighborhood. An abandoned unsecured building located close to a school for example or one that is being used as a crack house. Some actions would just requirer boarding the building or install a security fence around the property.
> 
> ...


mtlogcabin -

Thanks.  I don't think that I need a committee and neither does the city attorney or my boss.  I am the BO/Code Enforcement person/department.  As a party of 1, I will gladly accept help if I think I need it and, on the flip side, I am also not afraid to ask for help if I think I need it.  Maybe I'm just a little touchy but I don't like being treated like I don't know what I'm doing (read - you're just a girl).


----------



## FM William Burns (Dec 13, 2011)

> Quick Poll on Code Enforcement I am charged with Code Enforcement as well as a myriad of other duties.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

After reading the other postings, I’m inclined to agree that the authority for abatement lays with you since your Chapter 5 tasks you with the enforcement of the PMC.  As MT mentions there are many factors to evaluate while prioritizing and developing a list for abatement and this is where a committee can be of some benefit.  Maybe the FM can serve on a future committee if you feel that is the direction the prioritizing should travel.  The fire department and police department can give insights that are useful in determining how hazardous the structure is and what safety and welfare issues it may have to the community of a non structural nature.



Possibly extend the olive branch to the FM and test the waters (if not already done).  If the political climate with the FM and alleged issues with the council member can not be overcome, well so be it.  You are still the one in charge of the process according to your Chapter 5 of the jurisdiction’s code in my opinion. Only after this attempt you may want to extend the same branch to the PD and FD chiefs and possibly and explain what you wish to do in the future and desire for their assistance for the safety and welfare of the entire community and the issue with the FM may suddenly get resolved.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Dec 13, 2011)

It also sounds like the FM may not fully understand how the procedures work in your jurisdiction. Maybe he really thinks you burn down unsafe buildings.

Here the FM has a lot of power but condemning buildings for maintenance is not in his portfolio. That falls under the BO here. We also condemn the buildings that have suffered extensive fire damage. That falls under BO also. Access to these houses Often comes from the FM so you need to keep him on your good side. Often we are not even notified of fires in the county we just hear about them on the radio or tv.  The FD puts them out and goes home.

Best advice. Sit down with him and have some good old communication. Make sure he knows what you do and why and show him the sections that give you authority and then come up with some ways for him to help if appropriate.


----------



## Alias (Dec 14, 2011)

FM William Burns said:
			
		

> After reading the other postings, I’m inclined to agree that the authority for abatement lays with you since your Chapter 5 tasks you with the enforcement of the PMC.  As MT mentions there are many factors to evaluate while prioritizing and developing a list for abatement and this is where a committee can be of some benefit.  Maybe the FM can serve on a future committee if you feel that is the direction the prioritizing should travel.  The fire department and police department can give insights that are useful in determining how hazardous the structure is and what safety and welfare issues it may have to the community of a non structural nature.
> 
> Possibly extend the olive branch to the FM and test the waters (if not already done).  If the political climate with the FM and alleged issues with the council member can not be overcome, well so be it.  You are still the one in charge of the process according to your Chapter 5 of the jurisdiction’s code in my opinion. Only after this attempt you may want to extend the same branch to the PD and FD chiefs and possibly and explain what you wish to do in the future and desire for their assistance for the safety and welfare of the entire community and the issue with the FM may suddenly get resolved.


FMWB -

I presented tonight at council and received the blessing to proceed with the abatements.  When I start an abatement proceeding, I consult with the other departments that may be impacted or involved.  The only objection that I received was from the one councilman.

What it comes down to is politics.  I Noticed a 'muckity muck' for owning a substandard property and he tried to play "gotcha" and get me in trouble.  My boss pointed out that we had been doing this for a number of years and that the city hadn't been sued.

Oh, and I forgot to mention that the council member is the Fire Chief.  His brother is the FM, and, well.........we're a small town

after all..........   I think you get the picture.


----------



## Alias (Dec 14, 2011)

Daddy-0- said:
			
		

> It also sounds like the FM may not fully understand how the procedures work in your jurisdiction. Maybe he really thinks you burn down unsafe buildings. Here the FM has a lot of power but condemning buildings for maintenance is not in his portfolio. That falls under the BO here. We also condemn the buildings that have suffered extensive fire damage. That falls under BO also. Access to these houses Often comes from the FM so you need to keep him on your good side. Often we are not even notified of fires in the county we just hear about them on the radio or tv.  The FD puts them out and goes home.
> 
> Best advice. Sit down with him and have some good old communication. Make sure he knows what you do and why and show him the sections that give you authority and then come up with some ways for him to help if appropriate.


Daddy-O -

I have had the FM with me on condemnations so, he knows how it works.  It was politics pure & simple.  A case of 'the good ol' boy' network attempting to circumvent the law.  Yes, I am turning into a cynic and I don't like it.


----------



## Keystone (Dec 14, 2011)

Alias, as others have pointed out you are on track. Good to see your council is acting in the municipalities best interest.

In my experiences, when you see a commitee or sub-council formed it involves seeking and the us of local, state or federal funds in conjunction with concurrent multiple condemantions, the re-purposing of the aquired land which adds an additional buffer for the municipalities decision to be upheld if challenged.


----------



## Inspector 102 (Dec 14, 2011)

Alias -

Since I also wear many hats, I have been charged with abatement of these type of structures for this community. I have gone through 3 different cases where I have completed all the paperwork, public hearings and related procedures only to have the Board of Public Works drop the ball when it comes to final action required by the orders delivered. Apparently our attorney does not have the ***** to follow through with enforcement. I have taken the stance that I have done my job to the fullest extent that I have the power to do, the rest is up to the Board of Works. Currently working with burned out meth house that the mayor wants torn down yesterday but the attorney wants to "tickle" the property owner to obtain compliance. That is his way of saying "can't we all just get along". This case has been going on for 13 months now. I have informed the mayor (also a girl) my stance on the city counsel.

Gender has nothing to do with the ability to perform ones given task. I would put my wife up against any contractor in this community and bet the farm on my wife winning. I would suggest to take on each project the same, follow established guidelines for enforcement, document each step, and cover thy backside.

PS - Trebuche 90% completed and expect to test fire this weekend.


----------



## north star (Dec 14, 2011)

*& - - - - - - - - - - &*





> "It was politics pure & simple. A case of 'the good ol' boy' networkattempting to circumvent the law. Yes, I am turning into a cynic and I don't
> 
> like it."


Say it ain't so Sue!......."IF " you can, try to make the best of this thatyou can.........You have the authority!........Establish your policies and

guidelines and run with it........There will always be people who want to

circumvent everything.......No, they are not going to like their cronies being

made to do what the elected officials have directed you to do......I wouldn't

worry too much about it.

Here's another way to view this......You have already battled and beaten cancer,

plus you drive a snow plow truck clearing the roads for the municipality.....You

are most definitely a winner and are on the right track!.....Don't let the weasels

get you down too much........Certain people didn't like Jesus and his actions

either!  

The FM & Fire Chief can either work with you or not!......Always try to be

"above board" [ as I'm sure you are already doing ] in your actions, with

plenty of transparency.

Hang in there!  

*& - - - - - - - - - - &*


----------



## Alias (Dec 14, 2011)

Well, the bus didn't run me over completely.     I survived, and thanks to everyone who took the time to respond.  My boss did manage to get to at least one or two councilmen beforehand and explain how he felt that I was doing the right thing.  Kudos to him for doing that.  Public Works here gets everything dumped on them and blamed if anything goes wrong.  We're a pretty tough bunch.  

Onward and Upward......


----------

