Loading...
03-21-1996 '-' ..., CITY OF EDGEWATER CITIZEN CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, MARCH 21, 1996 COMMUNITY CENTER 5:30 p.M. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Donald Schmidt called to order the regular meeting of the Citizen Code Enforcement Board at 5:30 p.m., Thursday, March 21, 1996. ROLL CALL: Members present were Chairman Donald Schmidt, George Cowan, Frank Roberts, Maureen Borner, Joan Strong, Dennis Vincenzi, and Tony Fowler. Also present were Beverly Kinney-Johnson, Code Enforcement Officer; Paulette Tubbs, Edgewater Police Department Records Supervisor/Public Information Officer; Krista A. Storey, City Attorney; Mark P. Karet, Director of Community Development; and Liz McBride, Board Coordinator. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mrs. Strong moved to accept the minutes of February 15, 1996, seconded by Mrs. Borner. Motion CARRIED 6-0. Mr. Cowan was absent from the February 15, 1996 meeting; therefore, he did not vote. SWEARING IN OF WITNESSES: Chairman Schmidt requested Beverly Kinney-Johnson, Code Enforcement Officer, and anyone else with statements or comments pertaining to any of the cases, stand and be sworn in. Mrs. Johnson; Ms. Tubbs; Charlotte Perviteria, 1316 Travelers Palm Drive, Edgewater, Florida; Lorraine Reil, 2752 Banyan Tree Drive, Edgewater, Florida; Jay K. Patel, 131 Glendale Drive, Longwood, Florida; and Curtis Williams, 157 Wildwood Avenue, Edgewater, Florida, were sworn in at this time. CASES IN COMPLIANCE/CONTINUEDIWITHDRA WN: * 96-CE-0022, Elwood B. & Frances Sides, Jr., in compliance * 96-CE-0075, CB Industries, Inc., c/o Charles Baldwin, continued UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Case #93-CE-0624 - Marie & AI DiBenedetto. Krista A. Storey, City Attorney, referred to a memorandum addressed to the Code Enforcement Board dated March 13, 1996, in regard to receiving payment of a fine of $120. Ms. Storey requested the Board acknowledge receipt of the payment and authorize the Chairman to execute the Satisfaction of Lien. Mr. Roberts so moved, seconded by Mr. Cowan. Motion CARRIED 7-0. '-' Citizen~de Enforcement Board Minutes - March 21, 1996 Page -2- Case #95-CE-0300 - Curtis & Patricia Williams, Sr. Not connected to City water distribution system due to failure to pay water bill, Section 19-11(a). Mr. Williams requested a rehearing of this case, which was originally heard by the Board on January 18, 1996. Beverly Kinney-Johnson, Code Enforcement Officer, recounted that the City disconnected the connection to the water distribution system because Mr. Williams had failed to pay his water/sewer bill since August 3, 1990. She reported the current balance on the bill was $2,260.67, plus a $10 reconnect fee. Ms. Johnson verified through the Utilities Department that Mr. Williams had been obtaining water from a private well on his property then releasing the waste water into the City's sewer system. She stated according to the Board's order, the Violator was to abate the violation by paying any costs and penalties to have the water meter installed and use water from the City's water distribution system for the property by February 15, 1996, or a fine of$50 per day would be imposed for each day the violation continued past that date. Since the Violator had not connected to the City's water distribution system, Ms. Johnson recommended the Board's Order stand. Curtis Williams, Sr., 157 Wildwood Avenue, Edgewater, Florida, said the City shut off his water because he was five days late paying his water bill, and that he had been shut offbefore. He felt the City's intent was to collect extra money when the property is reconnected. Mr. Williams said when he was shut off the last time, he told the City to leave it off because he would not pay the re- connection fee. Mr. Williams said he had been using his neighbor's water by use of a hose, and had been paying him for the use. Discussion followed on Mr. Williams's use and payment of his neighbor's water. Ms. Storey indicated the ordinance requires each building be connected to City water, and that there is a minimum capacity charge. She said this minimum charge continues to accrue even if the meter it not connected, unless the capacity has been abandoned. If capacity is abandoned, and someone wants to resume connection to the system, impact fees would be due for water and sewer. Mr. Williams felt he only owes the amount up to when the water was shut off Ms. Storey said according to a March 21, 1996 print out, he owed $2,343.60 plus connection fee. Mr. Williams said he should not be charged for something he wasn't using. Ms. Storey then stated, the ordinance does not provide for any exceptions to the requirements for connections. Mr. Roberts moved that the fine be upheld, seconded by Mrs. Strong. Motion CARRIED 7-0. NEW BUSINESS: Case #96-CE-0093 - Jay K. Patel, President, Alarmtronic Systems on behalf of Dr. Leslie Lee. Excessive false alarms declared a public nuisance, Section 12-66(a)&(b). Krista A. Storey, City Attorney, summarized the ordinance. Paulette Tubbs, Records Supervisor/ Public Information Officer for the Edgewater Police Department reported the Police Department responded to seven (7) false alarms, ( July 15, 1995, August 22, 1995, August 23, 1995, three (3) on August 24, 1995, and August 27, 1995) at 2325 S. Ridgewood Avenue. She said the alarm reports did not indicate that any violent weather conditions or extraordinary circumstances existed on the dates in question, and recommended the Board uphold the false alarm determination. '-" Citizen"..de Enforcement Board Minutes - March 21, 1996 Page -3- Jay K. Patel, 131 Glendale Drive, Longwood, Florida, said four motion sensors were installed at this location, and he then proceeded to explain how the sensitivity is checked and adjusted. He said his company tried to limit the duration of the siren to avoid being a nuisance. Mr. Patel explained how the system works, and what adjustments were made to eliminate the false alarms. He said there were no equipment malfunctions on the dates in question, and said he could not say why the alarms went off Mr. Patel said steps were taken to reduce the sensitivity, and had been no problems since. He said he did not dispute the alarms. He also said his company installed an alarm system in a neighboring office, and that they too were experiencing similar problems. Mr. Patel discussed his findings. Mr. Fowler asked Mr. Patel if Alarmtronic verified who set off alarm before calling the Police Department; referring to the police alarm report which indicated on July 15, 1995, the alarm was set off upon entering. Mr. Patel then explained the companies procedures. Lorraine Hei!, 2752 Banyan Tree Drive, Edgewater, Florida, Dr. Lee's office manager, said she was the one who responds to alarms for this property location. She explained the first false alarm was accidentally set off, and subsequent alarms revealed no one was in the building. When Ms. Heil responded to the last false alarm, she said a police officer at the scene indicated it was possible that someone rattled the doors which could cause the motion sensors in the front area to make the alarm go off. Since Mr. Patel disconnected the sensor at the front door, she said they had had no more problems. She also said since there had been no more problems, the office was not aware of any fines until January 11, 1996, when they received six (6) letters with different amounts. She questioned the delay in notification. Ms. Storey explained the procedure for obtaining an alarm permit, and that the fines associated with false alarms had been in place since March 21, 1994. She said at that time, there was a grace period allowed to register alarm permits, before enforcement could be initiated. She also explained there was a delay in processing the fines because of a new automated system, but in the future, once a false alarm was reported, notice would be given. Ms. Storey said the police officers had been leaving notification at the addresses involved at the time of the false alarms. She stated that years prior to this ordinance going into effect, false alarm responses by the police department were astronomical. She said since the City has seen a dramatic decrease in the number of false alarms, the ordinance is working. Mr. Fowler, after hearing the testimony presented and the recommendation of staff, moved in reference to Case Number 96-CE-0093 that the false alarm determination be upheld to the extent of a fine amounting to $120.00, because he felt it was impossible to totally "debug" an alarm system under real conditions prior to having problems. He further moved that the $120.00 was based on an average of $30 per call as the expense to the City, which would be for the four false alarms which exceeded the first three, seconded by Mrs. Bomer. Motion CARRIED 4-3. Mr. Roberts, Mrs. Strong and Mr. Vincenzi voted no. Case #96-CE-0076 - Sheila Lloyd. Alarm permit required, Section 12-62. Ms. Lloyd appealing $25 registration fine. Krista A. Storey, City Attorney, pointed out, since no one was in attendance to present testimony, the Board could continue the case until the next meeting or up hold the fine. Chairman Schmidt suggested the case stand as is. Citizen....,de Enforcement Board Minutes - March 21,1996 Page -4- Mrs. Bomer moved in reference to Case Number 96-CE-0076 that the permit fine of $25 be upheld, seconded by Mrs. Strong. Motion CARRIED 7-0. ~ Case #96-CE-0088 - Charlotte Previtera. Alarm permit required, Section 12-62. Ms. Previtera appealing $25 registration fine. Krista A. Storey, City Attorney, informed the Board this case was slightly different than the determination of a false alarm. She stated the ordinance required there be an alarm permit for any system that meets the definition of an alarm. She then interpreted more of the ordinance. Ms. Storey said those who obtain an alarm are given a reasonable time to secure an alarm permit. She said when a police officer responds to a false alarm at a residence or business and views there is no permit, it triggers a letter to the owner informing them of an alarm permit fine. She also said the ordinance does not provide for any waivers of the $25 fine, and recommended not to waive the fine. Charlotte Pervitera, 1316 Travelers Palm Drive, Edgewater, Florida, said the police officer who responded to her residence, told her the alarm (a $13.99 door hanger) was not an electrical device, and therefore, did not need to be registered. Ms. Storey read from the ordinance the definition of a false alarm. She said any device which may produce a sound that the police are liable to be called to respond, such device needs to be registered. After much discussion, Ms. Pervitera said she purchased the alarm device about one month before the false alarm response. She said she would have registered it if the officer indicated to do so, and felt she should not have to pay the fine. Ms. Storey reminded Ms. Pervitera she was under oath, and if her testimony to the Board was that she had her alarm approximately one month prior to the time the officer responded. Ms. Pervitera said yes, approximately one month. Ms. Storey then said to the Chairman, if this information had been presented to the City Clerk's office, there would not have been a fee attached to the alarm permit application. Mr. Vincenzi moved in reference to Case Number 96-CE-0088 that the $25 alarm permit fine be waived, seconded by Mr. Cowan. Motion CARRIED 7-0. DISCUSSION ITEMS: The definition of a false alarm was discussed. Revising the definition was suggested, since the defination was found to be so broad. Ms. Storey indicated no ordinance is perfect, but they can be revised. Ms. Storey said she appreciated the Board's comments. CODE ENFORCEMENT COMMENTS: ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made and accepted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by: Elizabeth J. McBride, Board Coordinator Citizen Code Enforcement Board c:lceblminutes\032196.reg