New Search
T <br />Engineering Division enforced on undeveloped property concerning the June <br />15- September 30 criterion. Notice was given through the Register Guard <br />and when the property owner failed to perform, a direct notice was given <br />to the owner. When required, Engineering was to employ a contractor to <br />cut the vegetation. <br />Change Without HCC <br />When HCC was abolished, no one was specifically assigned the enforcement <br />on developed property. When traffic or maintenance had a problem, the <br />originating division would send the owner notice and forward only the <br />non- compliant.cases to engineering. However, without adequate staff the <br />non - compliant cases did not get pursued. <br />FY 84 -85 <br />After poor performance in the post HCC era, a sere& of meetings were held <br />with Parks, Public Works and the !tanagers Office. As a result, a program <br />was set up to function for one year. The main points of the program included: <br />1) A half -time inspector funded through June 30, 1985 <br />2) Two full -time seasonal employees to be terminated in December <br />to follow up on non - compliant situations <br />As of November 5, 1984 a total of 77 notices had been sent with compliance <br />from 50. Additionally, the temporary employees addressed 21 additional <br />situations for which there was apparently no notice. In performing this <br />work, the seasonal employees assumed a responsibility given to the owner <br />by code. <br />The attorney's office has noted that there was a collection problem in <br />that the code was not adequate to create a lien. That correction has <br />been made and the City is waiting for the effective date of the revision. <br />Since the City has not followed the notice process and the inspector has <br />voiced his opposition to enforcement, it is yet to be seen if there is <br />to be an impact from the revision in code. <br />Problem <br />Parks feels that it would require 120,000 for a half -time "inspector ". <br />It appears that the function of this person would be to seek voluntary <br />compliance, since he would have no work force and lacks the desire to <br />enforce the code. <br />In conclusion, the program of voluntary compliince proposed by Parks would <br />not solve the problems of vision and obnoxious weeds. In fact as we experience <br />some repeat cases, the owners that complied before will not in the future <br />because we "let the other guy get away ". <br />