County Missing Opportunity to Collect Revenue

The AE-10 Zone, 10 acre minimum, is continue. If the violation is corrected an exclusive zone for intensive within 15 days of this First Notice, there agricultural uses and for those uses will be no fees or fines assessed. If which are a necessary and integral part however, this violation is not corrected of intensive agricultural operations. within 15 days or if you have not contacted this office to arrange an

On October 10, 2008, a non-compliance alternative compliance date within 5 notice was sent to a property owner days of this First Notice, you will be sent stating, in part, the following: a 30 Day Notice to Abate and you will “A field inspection by a Code incur an Administrative Fee of $270.” Compliance Officer on October 9, 2008, (See fee schedule at end of report.) confirmed that your property is in Ø 66 TULARE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 2009-2010

On November 3, 2008, Code that was incomplete and not accepted. Enforcement sent an e-mail to a The Special Use Permit Application concerned adjacent property owner specifically states, “The application regarding the non-compliant property must be completed in every respect with owner. It states, “…he will need to all questions answered and all appear before an Administrative Hearing requested information provided before Officer to prove he is in compliance. If the County can officially accept the he is not in compliance, the fines and application for filing.” As of May 19, fees stick to the property. However, we 2010, the Special Use Permit usually will grant a contract for the time Application has not been completed to remove the violation, but the fees of and/or approved. $1050 stay with the property. If this case receives a Hearing Notice, the cost 6. On December 19, 2008, a Notice of of any Use Permit will double in fees.” Violation and Order to Show Cause and Notice of Assessment of Civil Fines and

November 19, 2008, a 30 Day Notice to Penalties was mailed to the property Abate Ordinance Code Violations was owner by regular and certified mail. The issued by RMA Code Enforcement. The notice states the following: notice makes reference to the October “YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that if the 10, 2008 non-compliance notice and public nuisance is not abated and the cites the specific section of the violations corrected on or before such ordinance and zoning code violations time, you shall be subject to such fines that informs the property owner of what and penalties as permitted by law. they need to do within 30 days of the These include Administrative Fees set abatement notice. This notice stated: forth in the attached fee schedule, and “Violation 1 - Obtain a building permit fines and penalties in the amount of and complete all inspections required by $100/day from the date of this Notice law or obtain a demolition permit, for each day the violation continues to remove the seatrain and call for a final exist during the 30-day correction period inspection. to a total of $7,050. Should you fail to Violation 2 - Submit a complete use timely pay these fines, penalties, and permit application and full filing fees for fees, the County may also place a lien a trucking business in the AE-10 Zone.” on your property and, with regard to the The notice also states that the property Administrative Fees, place these fees as owner had already incurred a recovery a tax against your property. Interest may cost of $270 for failure to comply with accrue until such time as the fines, the First Notice dated October 10, penalties and fees are paid.”

On December 18, 2008, a Special Use 8. An Administrative Hearing was held on Permit was submitted to RMA planning January 21, 2009. The Administrative 67 × TULARE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 2009-2010 Hearing Notes indicated that the without a Use Permit.” The property “…property was in compliance prior to owner “…states in his application that the hearing.” This is inconsistent with he wishes to perform light maintenance. the investigative notes compiled by a This is only allowed inside of an Code Enforcement Officer on January enclosed structure. The following items 21, 2009, and put on record at the should be considered as additions to hearing, which stated, “I inspected the the Conditions of Approval: (1) No property for the Administrative Hearing maintenance of the trucks is allowed and noted the violations still exist.” unless the maintenance is conducted inside of an enclosed shop building. (2)

The hearing officer noted on the Screening shall be installed to shield Administrative Hearing Notes of January this trucking operation from view (such 21, 2009, that RMA can not issue a as plants). (3) No inoperative or permit without the approval of the wrecked vehicles or trucks shall be Special Use Permit for the seatrain. stored on this site. (4) Employee’s vehicles shall be parked behind the

The result of the January 21, 2009 screening.” hearing was a fine of $270 disregarding all other fines, fees, and penalties. 14. On March 10, 2009, a memo was sent to the RMA project planner from County

On February 21, 2009, a letter was sent Fire concerning this Special Use Permit from an adjacent property owner to a application, with the following County Supervisor inquiring as to the recommendations, some of which were: disposition of the trucking operation and “1. Provide all-weather access roads the problems associated with the code to the building or buildings violations. affected by the Special Use Permit.

On February 25, 2009, a memo was 2. The fire department shall be notified sent to the Director of RMA from the of proposed start date of any Code Enforcement Division concerning processing, storage, or special use an inquiry made by a County Supervisor granted and mitigated from the about this code violation. The memo start, and not after building states that the fees of $1050 were operations begin.” rolled back to $270 and all fines owed “4. Violations of any of these conditions the county were dropped because the will cause the fire department property owner made an attempt to approval of the Special Use comply. The memo also makes Permit to be rescinded.” reference to having another hearing on March 18, 2009 before the same 15. Nothing further has been done hearing officer. This violation was not regarding this particular code violation reviewed at the March 18, 2009 Administrative Hearing. 16. Currently, there are over 400 code enforcement cases not being worked.

On March 9, 2009, an RMA memo from Code Compliance was sent to the 17. As of November 16, 2009, Project Planner, stating the following, approximately $2,000,000 in fines, “The parcel that contains your project is penalties, fees, interest and liens is also the location of a violation. This owed to the County. violation No. [XXX} consists of trucking Ø 68 TULARE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT 2009-2010

The Board of Supervisors approved RECOMMENDATIONS RMA’s recommendation to consolidate Code Enforcement with Building 1. Enforce all established code and zoning Inspection April 2, 2009. This has ordinances. eliminated Code Enforcement personnel. 2. Take every action needed to track until completion all currently identified code

The last Administrative Hearing took and zoning violations. place in December 2009. 3. Enforce collections of all fines, fees, interest and penalties, as shown on the

Nothing further has been done RMA Code Compliance Division regarding this particular code violation. Schedule of Fees. CONCLUSIONS 4. Evaluate recent staff reductions of RMA Inspection and Code Enforcement Due to the elimination of Code Enforcement Divisions to determine effects on personnel, RMA is overwhelmed. In the past, revenue collection and code Code Compliance Division generated compliance. revenue. At present, with the significant staff reduction, revenues have decreased and 5. Start required Administrative Hearings known code violations are not being tracked immediately. and corrected.