New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
Vegetation
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Parks
>
Miscellaneous
>
Vegetation
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2014 10:15:44 AM
Creation date
10/17/2014 10:14:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Correspondence
PW_Division
Parks and Open Space
Document_Number
Medlin Vegetation Folder
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
2.2.2 Cost of the abatement program. In <br /> addition to the cost of the program of nuisance <br /> abatement undertaken by the City are all those costs <br /> associated with the program in general, including <br /> sending abatement notices to property owners who then <br /> cut their own vegetation, and inspecting these <br /> properties and so forth. It is difficult to place these <br /> costs on those who are also paying for the City cutting <br /> down their weeds, but the choice is to either have them <br /> pay or to place the burden on all the City taxpayers. <br /> 2.2.3 Policy choices. How much of these <br /> administrative costs beyond the personnel costs you have <br /> identified should be placed on the abatement bill is a <br /> policy choice for your department and the Manager's <br /> office to make. <br /> Presumably the practice of making the abatement <br /> costs a lien on the property has solved most of the <br /> uncollectibility problem. This does not make the lien <br /> program cost free, however. Even though the accumulated <br /> interest is eventually collected, the City has paid a <br /> large front -end cost and carried this cost for a long <br /> time before it is collected. <br /> A ten percent surcharge on the contractor's hourly <br /> rate may adequately reflect the share of the <br /> administrative costs of finding a contractor and <br /> generally administering the abatement enforcement <br /> program. This charge may not cover all the costs <br /> associated with the program that you decide should be <br /> paid by those who make the greatest demands on the <br /> program -- those who force the City to do the abatement <br /> itself. The City has a wide range of options for <br /> pricing the costs of abatement, depending on how much of <br /> the entire program cost is to be placed on those who <br /> force the greatest expenditure of time and effort. <br /> In any analysis of how much cost should be shifted <br /> to those people, you should keep in mind the <br /> relationship between these charges and other charges and <br /> charge rates that your office uses for accounting <br /> purposes and for actual billings to customers. All <br /> these should reflect similar rates and a similar <br /> philosophy. <br /> Recommendation: If the ten percent figure that Mr. <br /> Spickerman took from the dangerous building abatement . <br /> represents a reasonable approximation of the administrative <br /> costs of finding a contractor and incidentally <br /> administering the abatement program, this figure could be <br /> 4 -- MEMORANDUM <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.