Download
1 / 22
220 likes | 330 Vues
This presentation outlines key strategies and practices for achieving code compliance within communities. It emphasizes the importance of creating a safe and attractive environment through effective compliance services, educating the community, and addressing violations. Best practices like multi-departmental collaboration, staff training, and proactive measures are discussed. The historical context of Tigard’s code compliance approach, comparisons with other Oregon cities, and potential improvements through administrative options will be explored. Feedback from the council is sought to determine the future of Tigard's compliance framework.
E N D
Presentation Outline • Why Provide Code Compliance Services • Best Practices • Tigard’s Code Compliance • Local Code Comparisons • Administrative Code Options • Council Feedback & Discussion
Why Provide Code Compliance Services • Create and maintain a safe and attractive community • Establish and maintain community standards • Educate and inform • Bring violations into compliance
Best Practices • Match program to approach • Make it a multi-departmental effort • Training staff is critical • Consistent application of code
Clarify Purpose & Approach • Compliance/Enforcement • Reactive/Proactive • Prevention/Deterrence/Punishment • Education • Priorities and Desired Outcomes
Different Approaches Livability • Community Development • Reactive • Administrative Remedies • Facilitate Compliance Enforcement • Police • Proactive • Judicial Remedies • Punitive Penalties
Tigard’s History & Practices • Livability Approach • Past Practices • Intake via phone, email, counter visit, letters • Site visits to verify violation/compliance • Significant personal contact with complainant and violator • Summons to Court only enforcement “stick” • Compliance rate nearly 100% when pursued • Limited resources required some case selection/prioritization
Operations After Reductions • Transfer portion of case management to the public • Online intake started in July 2010 • System automatically opens cases in permit software; stores information on case • Spread compliance among staff with other primary assignments • Compliance priority lowered
Pulling a Team Together • Nuisance Case Processor • 0.2 FTE funded in fall budget adjustment • Development Code Violations • Assigned to Current Planning staff • Additional staff resources from Development Services-Planning and Building Divisions respond to Tree Code and Housing Code violations as needed • Management oversight
Strategies • Increase Efficiencies • Reduce case handling • Limit contact time • Use form letters • Compliance “as best we can”
Similarities • Selective focus based on budget, community priorities & program structure • Customization of activities or program • Economic downturn has reduced services • Cities seek to increase efficiencies • Code & program revisions, reassign duties • Increasing use of web
Major Differences • Organizational placement • Program Structure • Community’s Priorities
Expanding Options • Administrative Abatement • Provides additional carrot & stick • Administrative Warrant • Expedient & saves resources • Administrative Lien • Could adapt to existing finance lien process • Administrative Fees • Recuperate partial administrative costs
Administrative Fees • Duplicate judicial fine approach (discretionary; per violation; daily application) • Administrative overhead fee (discretionary; abatement cases; cases requiring significant staff time to resolve) • Flat fee (non-discretionary; per violation; applied periodically and for repeating same violation within specified time)
Seeking Council Direction • Should TMC be amended to add administrative remedies - abatement, warrants, and liens? • Should TMC be amended to add administrative fees? • If so, which options – daily/per violation, overhead/cost recovery, flat fee – should be included; at what levels and frequency?
