The Code Enforcement Task Force Monday night could not come to agreement on the issue of whether to require citizens to submit and possibly have their names revealed when filing a code enforcement complaint.
The discussion centered on recommendations on how the City of Malibu should handle minor and more serious complaints–e.g. threats to public health or safety, about code violations.
One task force member gave a disturbing analogy with which to compare the fear that some residents have of retribution if they are forced to give their names when complaining about a neighbor’s code violation.
He recounted how he entered a Malibu resident’s home on one occasion, was directed upstairs by the maid, and discovered the man in bed with two underage boys. He said he went to the local sheriff’s station to file a report, but when told he had to give his name, he declined to report it.
“I don’t want to end up in a ditch pushing up daisies,” said the member.
In a surreal response, the other task force members uncomfortably passed off the unsettling account with nervous laughter about his “pushing up daisies” comment and continued discussing the issues at hand.
Despite his unwillingness to give his name in such a situation, this member said he believes if someone is going to complain, they should be willing to put themself on the line and put it in writing.
Also agreeing citizens should be required to give their names, task force member Toni Semple said she believes a complainant’s name should be revealed to the person who is in violation immediately.
“How can we sit here and create policy to protect everyone from their neighbor?” said Semple.
Jim Schoenfield said the point is, basically, people fear physical retribution from neighbors if they file a complaint and their name is revealed.
“It’s not our problem,” said Semple.
Cutting down on the number of complaints, and what Schoenfield called “ticky tacky” (minor) complaints, as well as not have the city appear to be indiscriminately and aggressively pursuing violations, was also a concern of task force members.
The need for names shows whether the city is being pro-active or reactive, said Chair Jim Miller.
“I’m concerned that the city is pro-active,” said Miller.
“Dumpster diving” was given as an example of the city being too pro-active.
Task force member Bob Hart discussed the fact that some city inspectors have been known to “inspect” dumpsters that are filled with debris to see if any illegal unpermitted construction was going on. Inspectors would look up the address written on a dumpster and inspect the building with that address.
As far as a multitude of minor complaints that are too costly and burdensome for the city to deal with, Schoenfield said, “We want to discourage vexatious neighbors.”
“Somebody has got to be the gate keeper,” he said. “To decide where this [complaints] is going to go.”
Schoenfield recommended the city have someone who is knowledgeable about code enforcement issues, who would be able to refer non-serious complaints to a mediator.
Task force members also discussed current language used to inform code violators about possible fines if they do not comply with codes, as being too “harsh.”
A “kinder, gentler” approach is needed said attorney Todd Sloane.
In the end, most of the task force members agreed the wording of letters to violators needed “softening” without implying the city cannot impose fines, but also assuring code violators they are entitled to “due process of law” in the ability to go to trial if they believe the fines excessive or not warranted.
Of six items discussed at the meeting, only two were approved and passed by the task force: Limits on Testing, which eliminates any testing requirements which do not have the regulation of the building process (e.g., health and safety, etc.) as their legitimate goal; and all code enforcement complaints, other than thos involving threats to public health or safety, contruction and grading without a permit, and drainage and septic system violations shall be submitted in writing to the Code Enforcement Department or its designated staff members.