HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning September 11 20011
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
September 11, 2001
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Committee Chair Dan
McShane in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
Sam Crawford Connie Hoag
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
CODE ENFORCEMENT (AB2001 -285)
McShane stated the Council received a letter from a citizen about a garage
that has turned into a storage facility. He asked for an update on the issues
surrounding these types of problems.
Roland Middleton, Land Use Manager, stated there are three compliance
officer positions. One position is vacant. This matter brings up an issue regarding
the wheels of justice and how slowly they move. It is frustrating to deal with a
long -term violation of the zoning code. He has no means to make someone comply
with the code other than by issuing citations. He wants to have a code amendment
to create a unified code enforcement section. All compliance issues are now
handled differently. It puts a strain on staff to have different regulations for
different violations. Staff is issuing stop work orders that are different for each
issue. The division has generalized its policies on issuing stop work orders to make
sure they follow due process. Due process translates to the victims, which are the
neighbors, as slow and difficult.
His intent is to bring forward an ordinance that would bring all the land use
penalty assessments into one process. They need to make it a viable process. He
hopes to issue citations through District Court. Right now he is clarifying with
District Court what they would do if someone does not respond to a citation. He
wants to make sure the citation carries the weight that it should, before they make
that the only choice.
Right now, a violator may be issued a ticket up to $250 and go to District
Court to explain to the judge or commissioner why he or she is in violation. Also, a
violator may be fined up to $1,000 per day, which is rare. The process for issuing
fines is very cumbersome to make sure there is due process. Staff will issue fines
after looking at the issue. Another staff member through a peer review authorizes
the fine. Final authorization is through a division manager or his /her designee. At
that point, the violator may still request to remit the penalty administratively. It
takes a lot of time to go through that process. In the meantime, the neighbor is
Planning and Development Committee, 9/11/2001, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
still experiencing the violation. His hope is to issue a citation through District
Court. Any ticket has to go to a judge.
His goal has always been to bring people into compliance with the code.
That has to do with education and issuing correction notices. The vast majority of
people don't know what permits they needed, or hoped to not get caught. Once
people know what they need, they comply. Some people simply ignore the
regulations.
He requests Council support in reviewing the unified enforcement ordinance.
He also hopes that District Court will follow along with the program, so there isn't a
timeframe for this yet. The Council's support in letting the District Court know of
the seriousness of this issue is needed.
McShane stated the Council's relationship with District Court is strictly
budgetary. The Council has a limited say on how District Court administers their
funds. There is a public perception that the Council has to deal with because it also
receives complaints. He would be interested in supporting unified enforcement
procedures. If the County is clear about enforcing the code, and councilmembers
are uncomfortable about enforcing the code, then they should address the problems
with the code and not the enforcement.
Crawford stated the Lake Whatcom watershed driveway issue is an example
of that.
Middleton stated he would enforce the code, whatever it says. At the same
time, he is also trying to bring up codes that are difficult to enforce. He brings
forward code scrubs and amendments to the Planning Division. He is actively
involved with writing code because he doesn't want anything subjective in the code.
There needs to be criteria to administer the code. The code needs also to be
flexible to the types of uses they don't or do anticipate in a region.
McShane asked if the status now is to bring all the enforcement procedures
under one umbrella, and bring it to the Council in the future. Middleton stated it
would hopefully come to the Council in the next six months. He is trying to make
sure that the process that will be brought forward will indeed work, and is not just
an experiment.
McShane stated they need support from District Court. He questioned
whether the Prosecutor's Office is also an issue. Middleton stated the Prosecutor's
Office is involved in criminal charges. The Planning Department can ask for
criminal prosecution. The Prosecuting Attorney always assists with any
enforcement issue.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated she is involved in
infractions when asked to be. Regarding the complaint that generated this
meeting, she didn't know if there is anything the Council can do to resolve the
concerns because the concerns were the length of time it took to resolve the
Planning and Development Committee, 9/11/2001, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
problems. When one goes through the court process, particularly with infractions,
continuances are very easy to obtain. The court doesn't consult both sides on
those issues. Matters get postponed with just a phone call. It may be the best
process, but is not a perfect process.
Middleton stated he tries to bring everyone into compliance, no matter who it
is. That is the goal. Sometimes it takes a formal compliance procedure, but mostly
it just takes a phone call to bring someone into compliance. The vast majority of
people do their compliance work, and everything is fine.
He is cautious about setting up procedures that will take a great deal of time
for administrative appeals. A fine may be issued to someone, and the procedure is
that an appeal is to the division manager. He holds a remission hearing. Then, the
appeal can go to the Hearing Examiner, then to the County Council, and then to the
Superior Court. During that process, the violator hasn't come closer to compliance.
They hope to process an infraction by issuing a ticket and go directly to court. In
the cases that has been done, they have achieved their best success. Most people
don't mind paying a fine when they find out that a ticket goes on their credit
reference and becomes a criminal record. People are more willing to resolve the
issue quickly when their credit record is endangered or they may earn a criminal
record. The process now takes up staff time, hearing examiner time, and
councilmembers' time when they should really be resolved in front of a
commissioner who gets paid to make those types of decisions.
Also, the compliance staff prioritizes issues. Life safety issues are the
highest priority. The compliance staff also work on enforcement projects, such is
illegal billboards along the I -5 corridor and Guide Meridian corridor. The Columbia
Valley is a constant compliance problem. Last year, they worked on 97 compliance
cases regarding recreational vehicles (RV's) in Point Roberts. He often gets
involved in enforcement issues that really have nothing to do with land use. People
who are just upset with their neighbor on unrelated issues generate many
complaints. Other issues are valid problems.
The code can be interpreted differently by different people. The public has
no reason whatsoever to read the code. Staff's job is to educate the public on what
the code says and its intent. People who have flagrantly violated the code
sometimes don't have any idea they have done so. The codes are no longer easy
to understand. During the past four years, they've made 152 changes to the
zoning code. That is a lot of change in a time of change. Staff is constantly trying
to go through training programs internally to understand the changes. His push
next year is to establish outreach to help the public and all land use consultants to
better understand those changes.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was none.
Planning and Development Committee, 9/11/2001, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dan McShane, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 9/11/2001, Page 4