Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5J - Administrative Complaint Policy o~ PR.IO~ C,,~ \ 4646 Dakota Street S.E. U ~~ Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 4rINNESO~~/ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: APRIL 5, 2010 5J JANE KANSIER, BUILDING AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIRECTOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN ADMINISTRA- TIVE COMPLAINT POLICY I ntrod uction The purpose of this report is to review a proposed Administrative Complaint Pol- icy. The City Manager in a Plan B city has the authority to implement practices consistent with Council policies. Often administrative policies are brought to the Council. When the City implements policies such as; street sweeping and plow- ing, the public works design manual, personnel and drug testing policies the City is assuring that all residents are treated like in like situations. The proposed pol- icy we are bringing to you today is an internal, administrative policy to manage situations in which the City is drawn into civil disputes. Current Circumstances The City Code Enforcement Officer receives an average of 250 complaints each year. Once a complaint is received, most of our contact is with the owner of the property on which the violation is located. At this point, we have very little con- tact with the complainant, with the exception of a follow-up contact or two. This system works fairly well, and provides access to residents and business owners who have concerns about neighboring property. The Minnesota Data Practices Act requires the CITY not to disclose the name of the complainant. In some instances, however, this system can be abused. What begins as a sim- ple complaint escalates into a feud between two parties. Both parties use the complaint process to antagonize each other, and City staff finds themselves in the middle. To manage these situations, the City staff and the City Attorney have developed the attached policy. The City has a limited number of enforcement tools avail- able to it, but as Jesse Corrow reported to you recently, approximately 250 prop- erty owners respond once they learn there has been a complaint. The Adminis- trative Complaint Policy is for internal use ONLY. The purpose of this policy is to establish a protocol and standards for the Staff to apply to determine whether the enforcement tools available to the City are ineffective based on the circum- stances of the complaint or where the complaint involves a matter primarily pri- vate in nature. The policy defines Excessive Complaints as "ongoing complaints" where: 1. The alleged violation does not pose an immediate risk to public health and safety, or there is no high risk to health and safety through potential environmental impacts, or where no work is being done or actions taken without the necessary permits: 2. The nature of the complaints move from reporting a legitimate Code vio- lation to using the.f~tx t.o harass another party; 3. One or both'^8'f'tHeL~Ri~lfhfsc8ffiained leQal counsel: Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 4. One or both oft the parties has threatened litigation against the City; and 5. The parties refuse to participate in processes identified by the City (e.g., mediation) to attempt to resolve the dispute and reach a mutually accept- able accord." Excessive and repetitive complaints by the same party or parties consume con- siderable Staff time. The Staff must inspect the alleged violation, talk with the parties involved, write letters requesting corrective action, perform a follow up inspection and have further discussions with involved parties. At the present time there is no formula, either objective or subjective to determine whether the City has been successful. The City has the following tools available to it to deal with Code Violations: 1. Contact the violator and ask for their cooperation in addressing the Code violation. 2. Send the violator a letter specifying the section of the Code that is being violated, what the violator must do to remedy the situation, and how long the violator has to bring the defect or situation up to code. 3. Continue to work with the violator to encourage compliance. 4. If it becomes obvious that the violator is just "blowing smoke in your face" and not making any effort to address the situation after repeated written request, the City can issue a criminal citation requiring the violator to appear in court. In our experience the County usually negotiates a small fine and dismisses the case. 5. Pursue the violator in a civil action brought by the City Attorney against the violator. This tool is used where the violation is sufficiently grievous or when health, safety, and welfare are at risk. This option is costly, but the City Attorney has developed all the materials needed to put together a Summons and Complaint. Ms. Pace then organized a meeting with the Chief Judge and Associate District Court Judges to discuss the resi- dents' attitude toward Code enforcement when the repercussions from the violation are relatively insignificant. This dialogue, in which the City Manager played a significant role, informed us about the plea bargaining. The Judges indicated they thought the civil complaint policy was far more efficient. In determining whether City efforts has been unsuccessful Staff will consider the following: 1. How much time the City has invested in working with the parties to ad- dress the City Code violation. 2. Whether the City has recommended a viable solution that is achieva- ble within a reasonable amount of time (90 days). 3. Whether the nature of the violation is creating a dangerous situation that puts people and property at risk. 4. Whether the essential basis of the dispute is civil. Once a determination is made, the Staff will: 1. Consult with the City Attorney about the City's legal obligations and op- tions. If appropriate and there is reason to believe that some form of mediation process may work, the City may offer to arrange for a media- 2 ISSUES: FINANCIAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: tion session. The City will not be responsible for any costs related to me- thods used to resolve the dispute, not withstanding the fact the City rec- ommended the parties participate in a form of alternative dispute resolu- tion. 2. If one or both parties refuse mediation, the City Attorney will notify the parties via letter of the City's intent to discontinue participation. 3. Moving forward all complaints from the parties must be in writing. 4. The Staff will investigate any complaints and take the appropriate action. The staff will not follow-up with the complainant. Conclusion The proposed policy is not intended to ignore code violations or to discourage citizens from reporting potential code violations. The policy attempts to manage situations which should be more appropriately handled privately. It is not our in- tention to ignore code violations. What we plan to do is develop a policy for the City to use to extricate ourselves from essentially private disputes. The City has limited resources, in both staffing and funding, to manage com- plaints and code violations. The City has the right to choose how to best use these resources. The proposed Administrative Policy establishes standards to determine when the process is no longer effective. As noted above, we do not intend to ignore complaints. We will continue to take the appropriate action when a legitimate violation exists. We may, however, choose to limit the amount of follow-up in certain situations. There is no immediate financial impact in establishing a policy. Such a policy will allow us to utilize our resources more effectively. The Council has two alternatives: 1. Approve the attached resolution adopting the proposed Administrative Complaint Policy. 2. Take no action and provide staff with further direction. RECOMMENDED A motion and second to approve the attached resolution adopting the proposed MOTION: Administrative Complaint Policy. Rev~1 ~ Frank 30yle ,Cit 1\ anager 3 o~ PRI04> co~ 4646 Dakota Street S.E. U ~ Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 '" 4rINNESO~~ RESOLUTION 10-XX RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT POLICY Motion By: Second By: WHEREAS Minnesota Statutes give the City Council the "power to provide for the government and good order of the City, the suppression of vice and immorality, the prevention of crime, the protection of public and private property, the benefit of residence, trade, and commerce, and the promotion of health, safety, order and convenience, and the general welfare as it shall deem expedient;" and WHEREAS, The City's 2030 Vision and Strategic Plan identifies protecting residential and commercial properties as a goal in providing a better quality community; and WHEREAS, The City has limited resources, in both staffing and funding, to manage complaints and code violations; and WHEREAS, The City has the right to choose how to best use its resources prudently;; and WHEREAS, The City Staff and City Attorney have created an internal administrative policy to establish a protocol and standards for the Staff to use to determine whether the enforcement tools available to the City are working effectively; and WHEREAS, The City staff recommends approval of this Administrative Complaint Policy. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA as follows: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein. 2. The City Manager has the authority to prepare and implement administrative tools to carry out the policies adopted by the City Council. 3. The administrative policy is hereby approved. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS STH DAY OF APRIL, 2010. YES NO I Myser I Hedberg I Erickson I Keeney I Millar Myser Hedberg Erickson Keeney Millar Frank Boyles, City Manager R:\Council\2010 Agenda Reports\04 05 10\complainl policy resol\J.ljOIil.DOC1 k WWW.clLyorpnorae.com Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 4646 Dakota Street S.B. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT POLICY INTRODUCTION Minnesota Statutes give the City Council the "power to provide for the government and good order of the City, the suppression of vice and immorality, the prevention of crime, the protection of public and private property, the benefit of residence, trade, and commerce, and the promotion of health, safety, order and convenience, and the general welfare as it shall deem expedient." The Prior Lake 2030 Vision and Strategic Plan states as a specific goal that its ordinances shall be directed towards" the protect[ion] of residential and commercial properties." To meet this objective, the City has developed a consistent, proactive code enforcement program. The City has limited resources, so City staff also relies on residents and business owners to provide information regarding code violations. City staff inspects every complaint it receives. When a violation is confirmed, the appropriate action is taken. Due to staff and time constraints, it is sometimes necessary to prioritize complaints and violations. When this happens, complaints are prioritized as follows: 1. Immediate risk to public health and safety 2. High risk to health and safety through potential environmental impacts 3. Work begun or actions taken without the necessary permits 4. Aesthetic and nuisance violations PURPOSE The purpose of this Administrative Complaint Policy is to deal with situations where one or more parties abuse the code enforcement system. What begins as a complaint escalates into a feud between two parties. Both parties use the complaint process to antagonize each other, and City staff finds themselves in the middle of what typically is a private or civil matter. The City has limited resources, in both staffing and funding, to manage complaints and code violations. The City has the right to choose how to best use these resources in a fashion that prudently utilizes taxpayer resources. The purpose of this Complaint Policy is to establish a protocol and standards for the Staff to use to determine whether the enforcement tools available to the City are no longer effective. The City does not intend to ignore complaints; Staff will continue to take the appropriate enforcement action when a legitimate City Code violation exists. Depending on the nature of the Code violation and the impact the Code violation has on the health, welfare and safety of the City and its residents, the City Staff will prioritize the list of pending complaints it receives The Staff may choose to limit the amount of follow-up in certain situations. EXCESSIVE COMPLAINTS The Staff will use the following guidelines to determine if complaints become excessive. Excessive complaints are ongoing complaints where: 1. The alleged violation does not pose an immediate risk to public health and safety, or there is no high risk to health and safety through potential environmental impacts, or there is no work being done or actions taken without the necessary permits: 2. The nature of the complaints move from reporting a legitimate Code violation to using the City to harass another party; 3. One or both of the parties has obtained legal counsel; 4. One or both oft the parties has threatened litigation against the City; and 5. The parties refuse to participate in processes identified by the City (e.g., mediation) to attempt to resolve the dispute and reach a mutually acceptable accord. STAFF RESPONSE Excessive and repetitive complaints by the same party or parties consume considerable Staff time to inspect the alleged violation, talk with the parties involved, write letters requesting corrective action, perform a follow up inspection and potentionally have further discussions with involved parties. There is no formula, either objective or subjective to determine when City efforts have been unsuccessful. In determining whether City efforts has been unsuccessful Staff will consider the following: 1. How much time the City has invested in working with the parties to address the City Code violation. 2. Whether the City has recommended a viable solution that is achievable within a reasonable amount of time (90 days). 3. Whether the nature of the violation is creating a dangerous situation that puts people and property at risk. 4. Whether the essential basis of the dispute is civil. Once a determination is made, the Staff will: 1. Consult with the City Attorney about the City's legal obligations and options. If appropriate and there is reason to believe that some form of mediation process may work, the City may offer to arrange for a mediation session. The City will not be responsible for any costs related to methods used to resolve the dispute, not withstanding the fact the City recommended the parties participate in a form of alternative dispute resolution. 2. If one or both parties refuse mediation, the City Attorney will notify the parties via letter of the City's intent to discontinue participation. 3. All complaints from the parties must be in writing. 4. The Staff will investigate any subsequent and unrelated complaints received from the parties and take the appropriate action. The staff will not follow-up with the complainant. 2