Mendocino County Grand Jury • 2016-2017 • Agency Response
Response to: Planning and Building

Response Form Grand Jury Report Title: Planning and Building Code Enforcement Division Report Dated: June 22, 2017*

Published: June 22, 2017 6 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 11 findings

F1
The CED Officers have considerable discretion as to whether or not fines should be asserted. California Penal Code §829.5 states that CED officers are, "...authorized to issue citations, or file formula complaints". Disagree partially. On January 10, 2017, the BOS adopted an ordinance creating a new Chapter 1.08 titled "Administrative Citations and Penalties". This chapter created standardized non-discretionary penalties and a hearing process in order to address the need to be able to effectively and timely enforce code violations while recovering county costs. In addition, Chapter 8.75 was modified to remove discretionary administrative fines. The BOS incorporates by reference Planning and Building Services response.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The CED approach to complaints is reactive and rarely considers issues outside the parameters of the complaint. Disagree. Code Enforcement regularly evaluates possible violations outside the parameters of the initial complaint.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
There are insufficient appropriate vehicles directly assigned to CED to allow safe and efficient performance of the assigned tasks. Disagree. The BOS has approved the purchase of additional vehicles for FY 2017-18 in addition to the added vehicles from 2016-17. Code Enforcement Division currently has sufficient vehicles to safely perform their duties.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
I have completed the above responses, and have attached, as required the following number of pages to this response form: Number of Pages attached: 4 I understand that responses to Grand Jury Reports are public records. They will be posted on the Grand Jury website: www.co.mendocino.ca.us/grandjury. The clerk of the responding agency is required to maintain a copy of the response. I understand that I must submit this signed response form and any attachments as follows: First Step: E-mail (word documents or scanned pdf file format) to: The Grand Jury Foreperson at: grandjury@co.mendocino.ca.us The Presiding Judge: grandjury@mendocino.courts.ca.gov Second Step: Mail all originals to: MENDOCINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT TITLED: PLANNING AND BUILDING CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors welcomes this opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury report titled Planning and Building Code Enforcement Division. Pursuant to the request of the Grand Jury, the Board is responding to the following:
F4
The turnover and lack of staff to conduct CED activities within Mendocino County contributes to issues not being corrected in a timely and consistent manner. Disagree partially. Turnover has contributed to inconsistency in the department. However, as stated by Planning and Building Services in their response, CED is currently fully staffed and turnover is not expected to continue. In addition the strong Code Enforcement Manager currently in place has greatly improved efficiency and tracking of complaint thus allowing transparency and oversight.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The shortage and turnover of CED management staff contributes to lack of clear direction for employees. Disagree. In April 2017, a Code Enforcement Division Manager was hired. This new position, along with a reorganization which made Code enforcement a Division rather than a unit, has provided clear direction for Code Enforcement staff. The BOS incorporates the CEO and Planning and Building responses.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The backlog number of complaints has been significantly reduced to approximately 300. The validity of this number cannot be proven due to lack of publicly available documentation. Disagree partially. As stated, the number of backlog of complaints has been significantly reduced. This number is now monitored closely with the CED new management system and database. The BOS receives a regular report of the number of complaints to include cleared complaints and backlog statistics at public meetings.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
There are no online data regarding code enforcement complaints and the status of code enforcement activity. This lack of transparency is detrimental to the efficient function of CED. The Grand Jury finds this lack of accuracy unacceptable because it is difficult: to determine if a complaint has been filed on a specific property to know when a complaint has been corrected · to know if there are duplicate filings of a complaint to have statistics to fairly assess the performance of the department to understand departmental operations in the interest of transparency Disagree. The decision to not publish code enforcement complaints, status and activity online is not detrimental to the efficiency of the Division. Records are available with a public records request. The BOS receives regular statistical updates at our public meetings. Inquires made by the Board are quickly and efficiently addressed.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
There are no regularly scheduled meetings between the staff of CED and the rest of P&B. This impairs the efficient function of both staffs. Disagree. The BOS incorporates by reference Planning and Building response.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
There are no departmental action plans in the report given by the P&B Director to the BOS. Disagree partially. The BOS receives monthly reports from PBS at regularly scheduled public meetings. While no formal action plan is given, there are updates regarding departmental activity and agendas.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
\boxtimes I (we) disagree wholly or partially with the Findings numbered below, and have attached, as required, a statement specifying any portion of the Finding that are disputed with an explanation of the reasons therefore.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The mold growth that was found is hazardous to the health of workers and citizens who frequent County facilities. Disagree partially. Any mold which is found is immediately referred to the Executive Office for evaluation and remediation. The BOS incorporates the CEO response to F11.
No recommendations for this finding

* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.