Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket 08-28-2007 WorkshopCity of Cape Canaveral SICIL WORKSHOP MEETING 'LANNING & ZONING BOARD :ITY HALL ANNEX ;nue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY August 28, 2007 5:30 PM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: DISCUSSION: 1. Proposed Chronic Nuisance Ordinance and Civil Citation Program. ADJOURNMENT: Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes, the City hereby advises the public that: If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, that person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose that person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. This notice does not constitute consent by the City for the introduction or admission into evidence of otherwise inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, nor does it authorize challenges or appeals not otherwise allowed by law. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City Clerk's office (868-1221) 48 hours in advance of the meeting. 105 Polk Avenue - Post Office Box 326 - Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1220 - SUNCOM: 982-1220 - FAX: (321) 868-1248 www.myflorida.com/cape - e-mail: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com Meeting Type: Workshop Meeting Date: 08-28-07 AGENDA Heading Discussion Item j No. Commander Scragg will present his views on the proposed ordinances. AGENDA REPORT CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL SUBJECT: DISCUSSION: PROPOSED CHRONIC NUISANCE ORDINANCE AND CIVIL CITATION PROGRAM DEPT/DIVISION: PUBLIC SAFETY/CODE ENFORCEMENT Requested Action: City Council review and comment on the proposed chronic nuisance ordinance and civil citation program as recommended by the Code Enforcement Board. Summary Explanation & Background: On June 25, 2007, the Code Enforcement Board, by unanimous vote, recommended the proposed chronic nuisance ordinance for City Council's consideration and on July 30, the civil citation program. Commander Scragg will present his views on the proposed ordinances. Exhibits Attached: Code Enforcement Board's memo; draft ordinance City Manager= ,Office Department PUBLIC SAFETY/CODE ENFORCEMENT (.q,ape.-nt mm\mydo mehts\admin\council\meeting\2007\08-28-07\nuisance.doc Law. i unu /.v, /-vv i City of Gape Canaveral To: Bennett Boucher, City Manager Susan Stills, City Clerk From: Joy Lombardi, Code Enforcement Board Secretary Re: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Chronic Nuisance & Civil Citation Codes On June 25, 2007 The Code Enforcement Board reviewed the Chronic Nuisance Code and the Civil Citation Code. By unanimous vote, the Board recommended approval of the proposed Chronic Nuisance Ordinance. However, the Board postponed recommendation of the Civil Citation Code until the July meeting for further review. 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1222 • SUNCOM: 982-1222 • FAX: (321) 868-1247 wwwmyilorida.com/rape • email: ccapecanaveral@cfl.rr.com Draft June 21, 2007 ORDINANCE NO. -2007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VI., OF THE CAPE CANAVERAL CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING CODE ENFORCEMENT; CREATING A NEW DIVISION REGARDING CHRONIC NUISANCE PROPERTIES; ESTABLISHING A REASONABLE NUMBER OF NUISANCE ACTIVITY CALLS PER PROPERTY IN ANY THIRTY (30) DAY PERIOD AND SETTING FORTH USER CHARGES FOR NUISANCE ACTIVITIES CALLS IN EXCESS OF THE REASONABLE NUMBER; AUTHORIZING A LIEN TO BE FILED FOR FAILURE OF PROPERTY OWNERS TO PAY USER CHARGES; PROVIDING FOR EXEMPTIONS AND APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE; SEVERABILITY; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City is granted the authority, under Section 2(b), Article VIII, of the State Constitution, to exercise any power for municipal purposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, certain properties located within the City of Cape Canaveral, due to their appearance or condition or due to activities taking place at said properties, generate more than the average number of law enforcement and/or code enforcement calls in response to said appearance, condition or activities at said properties; and WHEREAS, excessive law enforcement and/or code enforcement calls to the same properties place an undue and inappropriate burden on the taxpayers of the City of Cape Canaveral and create chronic nuisances; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to charge the owners of the properties at which these chronic nuisance activities repeatedly occur under the terms set forth in this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, hereby finds this Ordinance to be in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Cape Canaveral. BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, as follows: City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 1 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are hereby fully incorporated herein by this reference as legislative findings and the intent and purpose of the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral. Section 2. Code Amendment. Chapter 2, Administration, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, is hereby amended as follows (underlined type indicates additions and strikecnit type indicates deletions, while asterisks (* * *) indicate a deletion from this Ordinance of text existing in Chapter 2. It is intended that the text in Chapter 2 denoted by the asterisks and set forth in this Ordinance shall remain unchanged from the language existing prior to adoption of this Ordinance): CHAPTER 2. ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE VI. CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION 3. CODE ENFORCEMENT CITATIONS *** DIVISION 4. CHRONIC NUISANCE PROPERTY Sec. 2.292. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this division is to discourage repeat law enforcement and/or code enforcement responses to the same properties in the City of Cape Canaveral. Properties causing an inordinate number of law enforcement and/or code enforcement responses to certain activities or conditions existing at said properties unduly and inappropriately burden the taxpayers of the City of Cape Canaveral. As such, it is the intent of the City Council to impose the financial burden resultingfrom rom the repeat law enforcement and/or code enforcement responses on the persons and/or property owners necessitating said responses. Sec. 2-293. Definitions. As used in this division, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates that a different meaning is intended: City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 2 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 City means the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida. City manager means the city manager of the City of Cape Canaveral or the city manager's designee. Consumption of law enforcement services means the presence of one or more certified law enforcement officer or code enforcement officer employed or retained by the city on a unit of real propertyin response to an activity or condition existing or alleged to be existing upon thern op= resulting from a response other than at the convenience of the law enforcement agency or the city code enforcement office The presence may be caused by the a request of any person upon the property or information developed by the law enforcement agency or the city code enforcement office from any source warranting a response to the property. Excluded from this definition are courtesypections, criminal investigations of matters not arising from or connected with the property and paid off-dutXdetails of law enforcement officers. Incident of service means each time one or more law enforcement officer or city code enforcement officer commences and completes a response to an identifiable unit of property as recorded in a written report of the law enforcement officer or code enforcement officer settingforth orth the time the officers were present upon the property. Responses caused by false reports of nuisance activily initiated by third parties with the intent of harassing the unit of 12rol2erty, or for criminal activity that commences elsewhere and subsequently comes upon a unit of property despite reasonable efforts of persons responsible for the unit of property to exclude it, will not constitute an incident of service. Unit of real property means any contiguous lands within the city which are under common ownership or are devoted to a single use whichever is greater. Common ownership shall include all entities from which the same natural or fictitious person or people have ultimate benefit., Contiguous land shall include those separated by easements, sidewalks, alleys, right-of-ways and water bodies. Monthlyperiod means any consecutive 30-day_period. Nuisance activity means any activity, behavior or conduct whenever engaged in by property owners, operators, occupants or persons associated with a property that could be enforced by means of a proceeding before the ci , 's code enforcement board, through nuisance abatement or relating to any actions or offenses relating to the following subject matter: Firearms and weapons: (2) False alarms: Harassment of a neighbor, disorderly conduct, or disturbing the peace: City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 3 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 Battery, substantial battery or aggravated battery; (5) Indecent exposure; (h Keeping_a place of prostitution, or otherwise using the property for the purpose of prostitution; 21 Littering, solid waste or public health; Arson;_ Possession, manufacture or delivery of a controlled or illegal substance or related offenses: (10) Gambling-, LLI)_ Animal or fowl; (12) Trespass to land or criminal trespass to a dwelling, (13)_ Production or creation of excessive noise or vibration; (14) Loitering; (15) Public drinking and other matters relating to alcoholic beverages; (16) Intoxicating beverages, (17) Unpermitted or illegal business; (18)_ Selling or giving away tobacco products to underage persons; L9 Illegal sale, discharge and use of fireworks; (20) Junk vehicles; (21) Action deemed a nuisance under state Iaw; (22) Any action that is a violation of this Code which could be enforced by the provisions of this Code implementing the provisions of F.S. ch. 162; 2233) Act of aiding and abetting of the activities, behaviors or conduct enumerated in this City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 4 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 article; or L24)- Conspiracy to commit or attempt to commit any of the activities behaviors or conduct enumerated in this article. Person associated with means any person who, whenever engaged in a nuisance activity, enters, patronizes, visits or attempts to enter, patronize or visit or waits to enter, patronize or visit a property or person present on a property including but not limited to any officer, director, customer, agent, employee or independent contractor of a property owner. Sec. 2-294. Monthly allowance of services; user charges, service fees imposed. (a) The city council has determined that the following number of service calls is a reasonable and allowable number of nuisance activities calls for law enforcement and/or code enforcement personnel to respond to on a monthly basis: TABLE INSET: Type of Property Single-family resident or duplex.......... Multi -family residences, including_ Apartments; hotels; motels.......... Businesses.......... 30 -Day Period Allowance 3 calls 3 calls 3 calls The city council has determined that nuisance activity calls in excess of the monthly allowance of nuisance activity calls as set forth in this division shall be subject to a reasonable user charge/service fee as set forth in this section. (c) No user fee shall be charged for the first three (3) calls for service pertaining to a nuisance activity in a 30-day12eriod. The fourth call for service pertaining to a nuisance activity in a 30 -day period shall result in a $250.00 service fee being charged to the owner of the property on which the nuisance activity has occurred. (e) The fifth call for service pertaining. to a nuisance activity in a 30 -day period, and every call thereafter within said 30 -day period, shall result in a $500.00 service fee being charged to the owner of the property on which the nuisance activity has occurred. City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 5 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 Sec. 2-295. Notification of the nuisance activity_ procedures. Whenever the city manager determines that more than the monthly allowed services for nuisance activities could occur or have occurred at a property during a 30-dU period the city manager may notify the property owner and the person causing the nuisance activity, if the person causing the nuisance activities resides at the properLy and is not the owner, in writing that the property is in danger of becoming or has became a chronic nuisance. This notice shall be deemed to be properly delivered if sent either by certified U.S. Mail return receipt requested to the property owners last known address or if delivered in person to the property owner. If the propggy owner cannot be located, the notice shall be deemed to be properly served on any person as may be permitted by F.S. ch. 48. If a current address cannot be located, it shall be deemed sufficient if a copy - of the notice is sent by certified U.S. Mail, return receipt requested to the last known address of the owner as identified by the records of the county property appraiser. Additionally, the notice may be perfected, if posted or published in accordance with the provisions of F.S. $ 162.12 or its successor provision. The notice shall contain: M The street address or legal description sufficient for identification of the property which shall be sufficient if the tax parcel identification number assigned by the county property appraiser is used: A description of the nuisance activities that have occurred at the property and a statement indicating that a service fee will be or is being assessed against the owner of the property, A notice of the property owners right to appeal pursuant to this division; A statement that the property owner shall within ten 10 days of the date of the notice, respond to the city manager, either in person or writing with a request for an appeal Sec. 2-296. Filing of liens. The 61y may file a notice of lien in the public records of the county with regard to the costs of the city incurred pursuant to this division. Upon failure of the property owner to pay the costs incurred by the city, after a demand for payment being, made by the city, the lien mgy be recorded. Sec. 2-297. Exemptions. (a) A property owner may a12121y for and be exempt from assessment of the user charge/service fee assessed in this division and the provisions of sections 2-294-2-296 of this division by accomplishing the actions required in subsection Wof this section. The following_ property owners shall be exempt from assessment of the user City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 6 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 charge/service fee assessed in this article and the provisions of sections 78-117--78-120 of this article upon approval b, the he city manager: Multifamily residences, apartments, hotels. motels and businesses who employ off-duty law enforcement officers who provide for additional security for their property. La Multifamily residences, apartments hotels and motels which provide for a law enforcement officer to live on the property in order to provide for additional security or their property. Sec. 2-298. Appeals. Determinations of the city manager shall be finalprovided, however, that if the city adopts a hearing officer/special magistrate system, an appeal may be filed with the hearing officer/special magistrate whose decision shall be final. An appeal must be filed within ten 10 calendar days from the date of the decision appealed. Sec. 2-299. Reports: administrative rules. (a The cAy manaizer shall provide an annual report to the ci council apprising the ci council of the success of the programs set forth in this article and any matters relating thereto. The city manajzer is hereby authorized to promulgate administrative rules to implement the provisions of this article to include, but not be limited to the assessment of fees for applications and appeals as set forth in this article. Rules adopted b try manager shall be provided to the city council upon adoption. Section 3. Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adoptedby the City Council, orparts of prior ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict. Section 4. Incorporation Into Code. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the Cape Canaveral City Code and any section or paragraph, number or letter, and any heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the foregoing. Grammatical, typographical, and like errors may be corrected and additions, alterations, and omissions, not affecting the construction or meaning of this ordinance and the City Code may be freely made. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 7 of 8 Draft June 21, 2007 be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this day of , 2007. ATTEST: ROCKY RANDELS, Mayor For Against Bob Hoog Leo Nicholas Buzz Petsos Rocky Randels SUSAN STILLS, City Clerk C. Shannon Roberts First Reading: Legal Ad published: Second Reading: Approved as to legal form and sufficiency for the City of Cape Canaveral only: ANTHONY A. GARGANESE, City Attorney City of Cape Canaveral Ordinance No. _-2007 Page 8 of 8 City of Cape Canaveral To: Bennett Boucher, City Manager Susan Stills, City Clerk From: Joy Lombardi, Code Enforcement Board Secretary,; Re: Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Civil Citation Code ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On July 30, 2007, the Code Enforcement Board reviewed the Civil Citation Code and recommended that City Council approve the proposed code. 105 Polk Avenue • Post Office Box 326 • Cape Canaveral, FL 32920-0326 Telephone: (321) 868-1222 • SUNCOM: 982-1222 • FAX: (321) 868-1247 www.myflorida.com/cape • email: ccapecanaveralCcfl.rr.com CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING CITY HALL ANNEX 111 Polk Avenue, Cape Canaveral, Florida TUESDAY July 10, 2007 5:30 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem Bob Hoog Council Member Leo Nicholas Council Member Buzz Petsos Mayor Rocky Randels Council Member Shannon Roberts Others Present: City Manager Bennett Boucher City Clerk Susan Stills Assistant City Attorney Kate Latorre Building Official Todd Morley DISCUSSION: 1. Chronic Nuisance Ordinance. Prior to start of discussion, Mr. Boucher distributed a flow chart from the City Attorney's office related to the discussion. Attorney Latorre explained how a Code Enforcement action and a chronic nuisance violation might progress concurrently. She stated that a user fee was attached to the chronic nuisance violation in order to recoup for the services of law enforcement intervention. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog read the heading of an Ordinance amending Chapter II, Article VI of the City code regarding Code Enforcement creating a new division regarding Chronic Nuisance properties. Ms. Roberts recommended inserting language related to the City's quality of life as one of the intents as one the Ordinance purposes. Discussion concluded to place language related to quality of life in the WHEREAS provisions. Ms. Roberts questioned the meaning of Purpose and Intent. Attorney Latorre explained that the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Workshop Meeting Chronic Nuisance Ordinance July 10, 2007 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS clauses would not be codified in the City code, however, the Purpose and Intent would be codified. Attorney Latorre recommended placing the language in both portions. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog clarified that "quality of life" language would be added to the first sentence of Section 2-292., Purpose and Intent. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog reviewed Section 2-293., Definitions. Ms. Roberts suggested adding an "s" to the terms, law enforcement and code enforcement officer under the definition for Consumption of Law Enforcement Services. Mr. Nicholas questioned the meaning of, "other then at the convenience of the law enforcement agency or the city code enforcement office." Attorney Latorre explained that if the officer was in the routine course of duty and noticed a code enforcement infraction, then no inconvenience to service was imposed. Mr. Nicholas explained that some code enforcement action was still required which resulted in use of service. Mr. Petsos stated that the code enforcement action would probably occur during the weekday and not during the days of a nuisance call such as on the weekend. Ms. Joyce Hamilton stated that the City already had a False Alarm Ordinance and this would impose a second fine as a nuisance. Todd Morley, Building Official, explained that the Code Enforcement services were performed on a drive-by basis. He requested that the Council allow for a one-time occurrence unless Code Enforcement was called out on a violation. Mr. Boucher explained how several types of criminal violations, such as a false alarm, a domestic violence incident, or a narcotics complaint, could occur during one month at one unit. Mr. Petsos stated that the City has a successful False Alarm code and it should stand alone. Ms. Roberts pointed out how at some large complexes, as the City Manager said, multiple violations were possible. Attorney Latorre stated that the City ordinance allows for three false alarm occurrences in any one year, in which emergency services were called out, before any fines were imposed. Duree Alexander, Code Enforcement Officer, explained that a call from a resident established the nuisance activity. Mr. Boucher pointed out that the definition for Incident of Service established the different type of service calls for law enforcement or code enforcement. Mr. Boucher clarified his proposed amendment to the definition for Consumption of Law Enforcement Services, at the third line, end -of -sentence: add a period after "alleged to be existing upon the property" and strike out the remainder of the sentence. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog asked for clarification on an "identifiable" unit. Attorney Latorre explained the difficulty of taking action on a violator when a unit might not be identifiable at the location of the call. Council members discussed the "third parties." Attorney Latorre responded that this was a judgment call on an officer's part. Mr. Boucher confirmed for Mr. Nicholas that every dispatched law enforcement call was documented. Ms. Alexander explained that she submits her calls in a software program; she also logs City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Workshop Meeting Chronic Nuisance Ordinance July 10, 2007 Page 3 of 6 in Incident Reports as well as calls from the City's E -Better Place citizen complaint process from the web site. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog questioned the resulting action for a property that had a percentage of renters and owners. Attorney Latorre replied that the City would contact the property owner related to the unit. Discussion followed on the types of ownership. Mr. Morley suggested inserting the word "real" before the word property in Incident of Service as was done in Unit of Real Property. Ms. Roberts stated her concern with the 30 -day time in the Monthly Period definition. Ms. Latorre explained that the unit of time related to any 30 -day period, from date to date, not a calendar month. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog proceeded to the definition for Nuisance Activity. Harry Pearson, Planning and Zoning Board Member, related to previous discussion that used the City of Sanford ordinance which included misdemeanors and felonies under its list of nuisance activity. He stated that arson was not a nuisance activity. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog and Mr. Petsos agreed. Attorney Latorre explained how recurring crime was a nuisance to the neighbors. There was no intent to prosecute arson before the Code Enforcement Board. Mr. Nicholas asked if prostitution at a property also constituted a nuisance. Attorney Latorre replied that the City has a Code provision to prosecute violations of its code as a public nuisance which could be applied in this instance. Discussion followed on relief for a neighbor of nuisance activity. Attorney Latorre stated that her flowchart was intended to depict the complete realm of prosecution efforts. She explained how the Ordinance was a tool to impose a user fee related to law and code enforcement services. Mr. Pearson stated that this Ordinance generated from the short-term rental discussion wherein nuisance activity was said to have occurred. He said that he did not realize that the City was seeking to address felonies through this Ordinance. Ms. Roberts pointed out that this was previously discussed as a solution to any one who disturbed the peace. Ms. Roberts also suggested including growing marijuana. Attorney Latorre replied that she believed "manufacturing" was relative to growing marijuana. Ms. Roberts suggested another category related to feeding or harboring animals, such as feral cats or peacocks, which could become a nuisance to neighbors. Mr. Boucher stated that the the condominium associations handled the matter for their premises within their regulations. Ms. Roberts went on record and stated that feeding wildlife was a public safety and health issue for the City. Mr. Morley pointed out that perhaps there were statutory definitions that exist for the items on the enumerated list. Attorney Latorre explained that the list was just an example of what could constitute a nuisance activity and the Ordinance was written "broadly" to allow the City to address what it considers a nuisance activity. Ms. Roberts City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Workshop Meeting Chronic Nuisance Ordinance July 10, 2007 Page 4 of 6 pointed out that the issues of violation could relate to the person as well as the property. Attorney Latorre reminded that this Ordinance was written to address repeat nuisance properties and subject to a civil citation. She stated that the Civil Citation Ordinance would address someone feeding wildlife. Mr. Boucher clarified that this Ordinance, Chronic Nuisance, related to service usage; the next Ordinance, Civil Citation, would relate to a penalty for a violation. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog made note to include "domestic animals" to Item Number (11) and the City Attorney could draft nuisance language related to wildlife. Mayor Pro Tem proceeded to Item Number (12) in the enumerated list under Nuisance Activity. Ms. Robert asked if the property's amenities, such as a swimming pool were included in Item 12. Attorney Latorre replied that a swimming pool was covered under land. On the next item, Production or Creation of Excessive Noise or Vibration, Ms. Roberts asked what this item covered. Mr. Boucher replied to Ms. Roberts that there was a Statute that covered her concern related to motor cycle revving. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that this could also be addressed through the Condominium Association. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog proceeded to, Loitering. Ms. Hamilton questioned if it were illegal to sit on one's own property and drink an alcoholic beverage outdoors. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog replied that this was permissible as long as the person remained on their own property and their behavior was not unruly which became subject to law. Ms. Roberts asked why alcohol was not included in Item No. (18). Attorney Latorre stated that this was covered in Item No. (15) and drugs were included in Item No. (9). Mr. Boucher replied to Ms. Roberts that Item No. (20) addressed a property owner that continued to keep junk vehicles on his premises. Mr. Morley addressed No. (22) and requested to replace the word "this" with the word "City" before code. Attorney Latorre agreed that she could specify that the Ordinance related to the City code chapter for Code Enforcement. Attorney Latorre explained how the, Person Associated With, provision was intended to prohibit nuisance persons from entering a property. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog proceeded to Section 2-294., Monthly Allowance of Services; User Charges; Service Fees Imposed. Ms. Roberts stated her concern with the sufficiency of the 30 -day period as they relate to short-term rentals. Secondly, Ms. Roberts requested to reduce the number of calls to two within a 30 -day period. Mr. Petsos pointed out that this would allow up to three calls per month and for violations twice per month. Mr. Petsos also noted that short-term rental might constitute another classification. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog stated that three calls were too many within a 30 -day period and a fine at the fourth call; however, he did not agree with up to a fifth call but a revocation of license. Discussion brought out three calls per year. Mr. Boucher referred to Sub- City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Workshop Meeting Chronic Nuisance Ordinance July 10, 2007 Page 5 of 6 paragraph (e) and the provision which called for fines of a $500.00 service fee charged to the property owner for calls after the fifth violation. Mr. Boucher reminded that this Ordinance would also apply to hotels and businesses too and it was difficult to revoke hotel licenses using a City Ordinance. Mr. Nicholas stated that a more stringent Code would bring about the intent to maintain the City's residential character. Ms. Roberts stated that one of the things that would bring about license revocation was reaching a threshold and Council would need to determine that threshold. Attorney Latorre clarified that the City could only revoke their Certificate of Non -Conforming Status. The City could not revoke their State Resort -Dwelling license; however, the City could impose a fine under this Ordinance. Ms. Roberts stated that she thought those Resort Dwellings in the non -C-1 zoning district would fall under the revocation of license provision. Ms. Roberts stated that if it were not defined in this Ordinance, then there was no provision to revoke their license. Mr. Boucher clarified that the Council was not prosecuting under this Ordinance. Mr. Morley clarified that discussion was not for revoking the State license but for the Non -Conforming Status. Mr. Morley also pointed out that vacant property was not included in types of properties. He questioned why the differentiation service calls when calls would occur at any type of property. Attorney Latorre replied that they could remove the Table inset on Page five. Discussion followed on the amount of the fine. Attorney Latorre advised against becoming too severe in the penalties. Attorney Latorre referred to the Resort Dwelling and Resort Condominium Ordinance relating to losing non -conforming status when a person violated the three times within one-year rental provision. Attorney Latorre read the provision related to the City Manager taking lawful action which included seeking injunctive relief. Attorney Latorre explained how Section 2-295, Notification of the Nuisance Activity Procedures, was procedural to noticing the violator. Discussion ended in the agreement to strike the word "may" in the third sentence and insert the word "shall" to read "the City Manager shall notify the property owner." Mayor Pro Tem Hoog read the four instances of what the Notice shall contain. [Copy of the proposed attached.] Discussion clarified that the violator was required to file an Appeal within ten days of the Notice and the City Manager would have within 30 days to make a final decision. Ms. Roberts questioned Section 2-298 in which the City Manager's determination would be final. Attorney Latorre explained that the City Manager's final decision was based on the whether or not three infractions had occurred. This would set the fining process in motion. Attorney Latorre stated that the Appeals process in Section 2-298 would be clarified in the next Draft. City of Cape Canaveral, Florida City Council Workshop Meeting Chronic Nuisance Ordinance July 10, 2007 Page 6 of 6 Mayor Pro Tem Hoog read Section 2-296. Attorney Latorre replied to Ms. Roberts that the Lien was based on non-payment of the fine. Ms. Roberts referred to past instances of Liens and stated how staff time and Attorney's fees were also included as Administrative cost along with in those imposed Liens. Mr. Morley responded that the purpose of the fine was to cover Administrative costs involved in enforcement. Attorney Latorre explained that this was an Administrative fee based on the user charge. Ms. Roberts stated that there was a cost to the community for the nuisance upon reaching this stage. Mr. Boucher responded that Ms. Robert's recommendation would defer to the penalty structure and emphasized that this was a cost recovery action. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog read Section 2-297. Ms. Roberts requested to strike Section 2-297, Exemptions, in its entirety. Attorney Latorre informed that this was one of the provisions in the model Ordinance. Council members agreed by consensus to strike Section 2-297, Exemptions, from this Ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog made note that discussion would skip Section 2-298, Appeals, in order for the City Attorney's office to amend the language. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog read Section 2-299. Reports- Administrative Rules. Attorney Latorre explained that this would allow the City Manager to develop Administrative Rules. Mayor Pro Tem Hoog recommended changing the word "Rules" to "Procedures." Mr. Petsos pointed out that parking and excessive vehicles were not on the enumerated list of Page 4. Attorney Latorre clarified that those were included in Item No. (22) since these were already included in the City code. Mr. Boucher reiterated that the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance did not provide for a penalty but was an Administrative action for law enforcement and code enforcement service use. Attorney Latorre reminded that the Civil Citation would count toward the user fee. Mr. Boucher replied to Ms. Roberts that an applicant would make the Appeal to the Council for loss of Non -Conforming Use Status. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 8:15 P.M. Susan Stills, CMC, CITY CLERK