|
But if we had the ticketing system and I was driving by and I looked oh, you don't have
<br />house numbers. You got a little $25 ticket, and now you got it. Now we're much more
<br />efficient at doing enforcement. And then the emergency side of the house is much more
<br />appreciative of us, because now when they've got to go out and respond to an emergency,
<br />there's street numbers. Okay, any other questions in regards to consolidated
<br />enforcement?
<br />Okay, the second item that I recommended was to increase property tax for unpermitted
<br />dwellings. As Igo out and inspect properties, we go out there and suddenly we see a
<br />house. And this house is not on the property records. Or it may be on the property
<br />records, but it's unpermitted. So there again, I determine whether or not there's a zoning
<br />violation. Is the house in the setback? Are they doing something illegal? Are they
<br />running a business? Do they have chickens in a residential neighborhood? So if I
<br />determine that there's no zoning violation, I'll comeback butt still have to write a
<br />letter to the Building Division, let them know that there's an unpermitted structure. If
<br />there's environmental issues, same thing. PropertyTax, they for the buildings that are
<br />there, they may not have the right information, so I need to tell them. This probably
<br />would be better off rephrased. Instead of increasing property tax for unpermitted
<br />dwellings, to change it to eliminate homeowner exemptions on illegal structures, because
<br />then that would encourage people tooh, if I have an illegal structure and they come, I
<br />get a homeowner's exemption, and now I'm paying less than this guy over here that went
<br />through the permit process. So the idea is to try to get people to come into compliance
<br />with our law. And so I would recommend that we look at the way in which we tax people.
<br />And if it's an illegal structure, they're not allowed a homeowner exemption. Because the
<br />minute they get that, they'll end up paying less taxes. So we're basically encouraging
<br />poor behavior. So that's number two. Any questions on that?
<br />O'HARA: No, not a question well, I guess it is a question. Given that the tax records
<br />show the dwellings that they're recognizing, and Building has its own tax records, I mean
<br />its own records on those same TMKS, would it be a rather simple affair to write some
<br />software to compare those data bases so that you could pull out all of those unpermitted
<br />buildings?
<br />LEONARD: I'm going to say no, it wouldn't be easy. And one of the reasons is because
<br />right now, everybody seems to have their own system of software. So you would have to
<br />perhaps export if you're able to export it into a common program, each of these into a
<br />common program, and then compare, then yes, you could do that. But the level of effort
<br />to do that, I'm not sure what that would be. But Building Department tells you whether
<br />or not it's permitted. Property Tax tells you whether or not it's taxed. So I go to
<br />Building Department. There's no permits, so I don't expect to see a house. Igo to Real
<br />Property Tax, and here's a floor plan. And what we should do is, when Real Property
<br />Tax assesses these people, their specific code should say they do not get a homeowner's
<br />exemption if it's an illegal structure. It's got to be legal. Any other questions?
<br />Okay, number 3, mandatory bus trade -in program. This really is I mean, this is kind of
<br />a Building Department issue, people living in buses. It's a dwelling. For me, if the bus is
<br />out of the setbacks and it's on the property, that's not a real issue for zoning, unless you
<br />have two buses, three buses or more. And you're only entitled to one dwelling, based on
<br />E?
<br />
|