Funny Talk by the BCC
Funny thing happened during Tuesday's meeting of the Clay County Commission. Not funny ha, ha. Not funny, as in amusing of any kind. It was more the embarrassing kind of funny. Happened during a discussion about Code Enforcement, and how Clay County levies fines, then reduces them, and the whole process of trying to get local folks to keep their property up to code. It was funny how that discussion included and quickly discounted the County Attorney's input. Funny how it did completely ignore the apparently-stunned professional being paid to run Code Enforcement. Funny how the discussion managed to include Commissioners getting a close-up and personal look at a photograph of yard that needed mowing. Like I said, it was the embarrasing kind of funny that elicits a giggle to break the tension. Same kind of funny Clay County folks have seen far too often when watching their elected officials at work. The biggest weapon the county has to make sure property owners are up to code is a system of daily fines for each violation. It can add up quickly. Not long ago, once an owner got the property back in shape, the Code Enforcement Board adopt the Rodney King approach to governance. It wanted us all to just get along and would recommend that fines be reduced to whatever taxpayers' expenses were while Code Enforcement worked the case. The BCC would then approve the often substantial reductions as a matter of routine. But a few folks, including me back then, thought the process of fining and routinely reducing the fine seemed a little, well, funny. So, the County Commission's reaction to realizing that "that's the way we've always done it" isn't really a good reason to keep doing it that way, was to hire a lawyer, handsomely paid at taxpayer expense as always, to serve as a Special Magistrate. So property owners who might be unhappy with having to pay back taxpayers for Code Enforcement's expenses could appeal even that fine. Of course, as always, the County Commissioners reserved ultimate authority for themselves, so the Special Magistrate's decision also has to be approved by the BCC before it becomes official. That final BCC authority, of course, gives property owners another level to appeal their fines, which are already reduced as a matter of routine. Yet last Tuesday, the members of the County Commission spent 35 minutes of their time retrying one case that had already been heard in detail once by the expensive Special Magistrate. State law, by the way, already provides a means for property owners to appeal Code Enforcement fines and decisions. So the Special Magistrate is just a redundant service. An expensive redundant government service. That's bad enough, but with the way the County Commission conducts its funny business, the expensive, redundant Special Magistrate is little more than an advisor with no authority, who can be ignored on any BCC whim. Funny how our County Commissioners always talk about how they understand what their job is and that micromanaging isn't part of it, but they're looking at photographs and making decisions about tall grass. Obviously, they still don't get it.
Related: OneMann's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: BCC | Clay County | government
Submitted by smunsey on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 4:31pm.
The special magistrate is a joke. Last week they had a widow, who accured over $50,000 in fines. Her husband passed and she was left the property. Over a period of serveral months she stayed in contact with the county and tried to get the property up to code. She was finally able to get the property up to code, but not before accuring $51,000.00 in fines. The magistrate deemed she needed to pay the whole fine in full. After addressing the issue with the BCC, they reduced the fine to $3,800.00, which I thought was fair. The only commisioner with any sense in this matter was Bradley. Conkey showed no mercy and wanted this poor widow to pay the fine in full. When the case was first presented you would have thought that the fine should be paid in full, but after hearing the facts of the case, I thought the widow should not have had to pay any of the fine. A waste of time for the BCC? I dont think Ms. Rogers thought so.......... Make it a great day! Romney '08 Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net
Submitted by islander on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 8:12pm.
Code enforcement violators, no matter how flagrant, have a right to appear in front of the legislative body that is prescribing their fines. There may be information that simply is not put down on paper. Code enforcement has always been a knee jerk reaction. Someone complains, someone is dispatched to the source of the complaint, and a decision is made. Code or code violation? I was a code enforcement officer and I can tell you first hand how the offenders separate themselves. One group will come into compliance, or at least make an attempt, or at least offer an explanation as to why they cannot be in compliance at the time. The other group will simply blow off the enforcement, and since we cannot take property in Florida, and can only place a lien on the property, nothing is done. If the person truly does not care, and doesn't care if a lien is placed on the property, you are out of luck. I had a lawn service, that was contracted to mow a yard after the owner refused to comply with the ordinance, run off the property at gunpoint. Of course the sheriff was called, and he said that defending your own property wasn't a crime, so we were back at square one. Fines do not bother the true offenders, because they don't care. The ones who are willing to come into compliance are the ones that you really don't want to hurt financially. They are at least willing to defer to law and order. I have had a problem in my neighborhood for 8 years, and no one has been able to call the property owners into compliance. It is a lost cause. Submitted by semiredneck on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 10:50am.
It's interesting that Bradley was the only one with sense in your view S Munsey. He was the Special Magistrate for Green Cove prior to appointment as Commissioner.
Submitted by OneMann on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 7:48pm.
Islander, Code Enforcement has always been a knee-jerk reaction. I just think Clay County government has outgrown the "way it's always been done" and needs to continue its change from Good Ol' Boy to professional service. Code Enforcement needs to come along for the ride. As far as those who just simply refuse to abide by county codes and don't fear the lien on the property, there is little that can be done now. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for ways to improve the system, including some threat or action that achieves the ultimate goal of compliance. Michael S. Mann People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 5 users and 171 guests online.
Recent comments |
State law, by the way, already provides a means for property owners to appeal Code Enforcement fines and decisions.
The magistrate system was installed not to be redundant, but to levy the daily fine, rather than bring it before the Code Enforcement Board, which was found to be liberal in granting extensions and conservative in fines. (Just like the Commission) While they may pay more for the Magistrate over the volunteer board, they have a more productive system, and more frequent fines. I've been at a proceeding and the Magistrate has no problem in telling someone, "The fine is $150 a day back to the (deadline).
Have to side with the county on the magistrate, but not over 30 minutes to argue about grass.