📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Trinity County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
Building and Development Services Department
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 4 findings
F1
Page 21
One director, one administrative secretary and one full-time countywide building inspector staff the Building and Development Services Department. The numbers of outstanding building permits accumulating without follow-up are partly the result of one person trying to cover an entire county. Providing “Finals” on 721 permits is not currently a priority in either the Building and Development Services Department or the Assessor's Office due to other job priorities and a lack of staff. Moreover, there is no effective system to track permits and collect reinstatement fees on those permits that have expired. The Building and Development Services Department does have a part-time job opening for another building inspector. The position is unfilled, however, due to the lack of qualified applicants willing to work part-time.
F2
Page 21
Based upon in depth interviews with persons representing the Building and Development Services Department, Planning Department, and Assessor's office, it is evident that there is a need to create the position of a code compliance officer. This position would require knowledge of codes and code enforcement procedures. Duties would be to increase interdepartmental communication regarding codes and code enforcement, to handle the consolidation of complaints, and to be a primary contact for the public on such matters for those three departments. This will hopefully enable them to function more as a single unit in dealing with code matters. A person trained in handling code and zoning enforcement issues should be able to bring resolution to those problems in a more timely and efficient manner.
F3
Page 22
An amendment to County Ordinance 15.04.080 passed by the Board of Supervisors prior to 1991 excluded section 202 (c) of Chapter 2 of the Uniform Building Code, which eliminated the Right of Entry of Building officials into buildings or premises if such entry is denied by the landowner. This county ordinance appears to prevent department employees from enforcing all of the 2001 California Building Codes, however County Counsel for the County of Trinity has informed the Grand Jury Committee that a procedure does exist for building officials to obtain entry irrespective of the existing County ordinance. Upon interviewing employees in the Building and Development Services Department it was determined that none of the employees were aware of the alternative entry procedure. Because of this ambiguity in the County ordinance, County Counsel has informed the committee that he will clarify the ordinance with the Board of Supervisors and may have already done so before this Grand Jury report is made available to the general public.
F4
Page 23
The Building and Development Services and Planning departments receive numerous citizens complaints on a weekly basis regarding illegal structures, as well as recreational vehicles placements, refuge collection, vehicle/mobile home storage, junk collection and substandard housing. Current staffing levels in the departments are hard pressed to perform their normal day-to-day tasks, and it is extremely difficult to process these violations and in most cases this can take months and many hours of work to bring to resolution. Existing ordinances do not effectively control these problems within the county. These ordinances do not include appropriate sanctions for their violation in order that compliance is obtained.
Recommendations 4
-
R1Page 21The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors place a high priority on getting the improvements represented by the 721 outstanding building permits onto the tax rolls. This goal can be accomplished by expanding the current unfilled part-time job opening for a building inspector into a full-time position. This would have the effect of generating sufficient revenues to more than compensate the county for the expense of this expanded position (see
-
R2Page 22A. The Grand Jury recommends that a code compliance officer position be created and filled by a person with sworn peace officer powers that is (or can be) trained in the handling of code and zoning enforcement issues. The code compliance officer would act as a primary contact for the public and coordinate the functions of the Building and Development Services Department, the Planning Department, and the Assessor's office, in order to more effectively resolve citizen complaints and deal with code violations. B. As a cost savings measure, an alternative recommendation would be to combine the part-time building inspector and the code compliance officer into one full-time position (See
-
R3Page 22It is strongly recommended by the Grand Jury that the Board of Supervisors rescind this amendment to the county ordnance and reinstate the entire provision of Section 104.2.3 of the California Building Code (formerly Section 202 (c) of Chapter 2 of the Uniform Building Code).
-
R4Page 23The Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Supervisors, after input from the Building and Development Services Department, the Planning Department, and the Assessor's office, review the affected county ordinances and amend them as necessary to protect the health and safety of the citizens of the county. CONCLUSIONS: