Okaloosa County BOCC — December 15, 2015 — Discussion of Code Enforcement Changes — agenda request

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST DATE: December 15, 2015 TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board FROM: Elliot Kampert SUBJECT: Discussion of Code Enforcement Changes DEPARTMENT: Growth Management BCC DISTRICT: All STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Board will conduct a discussion of the proposed changes to the code enforcement provisions of the County Code tabled during the December 1, 2015 BCC meeting. BACKGROUND: The Board of County Commissioners has directed staff to revise the code enforcement provisions of the County Code to provide more effective enforcement. Working with the Code Enforcement Board and County Attorney's office, staff developed an ordinance which would, if adopted, enable the Board of County Commissioners to utilize the Uniform Method of Non-Ad Valorem Collection to recover the cost of abating nuisances on properties on which code violations occur. Per the Board's stated direction, the proposed ordinance specifically states that the decision to use the nuisance abatement assessment process will be done at the sole discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. The ordinance also relocates the code enforcement provisions from Chapter 11 of the Land Development Code to a new Article VI of Chapter 11 (Health and Sanitation) of the County Code. This relocation requires a complete re-formatting. In addition to the substantive changes above, the proposed ordinance also included housekeeping measures intended to provide clarity of enforcement, including a section that clarifies the specific code provisions for which the Code Enforcement Division is responsible, incorporating the table of fines and penalties into the Code Enforcement provisions, and codification of the code enforcement processes the County has always used but which were never stated in any ordinance or code. During the public hearing, concerns were raised that some of the measures went beyond housekeeping, and were more substantive. Due to these concerns, the Board directed staff to develop a document comparing the existing and proposed codes so that changes may be more readily apparent. Due to the amount of reformatting, a side-by-side comparison (see attached "Rosetta Stone") has been provided as opposed to a strike-through and underline version. Upon review, it is noted that the table of fines included in the proposed ordinance is incorrect and appears to have been from an earlier draft. This mistake will be corrected in the version presented in the continued public hearing. OPTIONS: The Board can discuss the proposed code enforcement at any depth is feels appropriate, and can provide staff further direction accordingly. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board discuss the proposed changes and provide direction to staff accordingly. RECOMMENDED BY: APPROVED BY: John Hofstad, County Administrator