The Code Enforcement Task Force finalized its last recommendations on Monday, deciding on issues such as grandfathering, the building application process and policies behind code enforcement itself.
During six months of meetings, the task force created three subcommittees responsible to draft recommendations on code enforcement policy, ancillary structure procedures and Interim Zoning Code revisions. Step by step, the entire task force group reviewed recommendations after they were drafted by the subcommittees.
John Miller, task force chair, said all three recommendation packets need each other to work. They are all important, although he indicated he is particularly happy with the ancillary structures recommendations, since they will make it possible for the owners to get existing structures permitted. The task force recommended that ancillary structures be grandfathered even if they were built after the primary home. But health and safety violations will still be enforced.
“That this task force accomplished anything at all, given the disparate views, is amazing,” said task force member, Todd Sloan.
There were three fundamental issues, said Sloan. Grandfathering was the hot button matter that started all of this earlier this year, he said. They want to give a period allowing people to come in and try to take advantage of relaxed rules to get building permits with a limit on how much it will cost.
Secondly, the task force attempted to fix the “Looney Toons” involving the prior city administration’s building applications process, where everybody admitted the process was designed to discourage building, even after an application was approved in concept.
“That was a perversion of the permitting process,” said Sloan.
Thirdly, and equally sensitive, were the policies behind the enforcement itself, said Sloan.
In the end, all three matters roll in together, especially the last two, said Sloan, “except one deals with enforcement and the other with permitting issues.”
The finalized recommendations will now go through a city staff review process that includes three steps. The building and safety, planning and legal departments will look at the recommendations before they are brought in front of the City Council for approval.
The task force committee will remain on call to assist those three departments with any recommendations they might not understand, and there is an opportunity for an exchange of ideas if they need to make changes, said Miller.
Dialogue may take place on certain items and then City Council will have recommendations that have gone through all the checks and balances, he said.
“We are the generators and they are the checkers,” said Miller.
“It let us frame the issues that were bothering the citizens of Malibu,” said Ted Vaill, task force member. “It made me realize that there are no simple answers.”
Sometimes people have legitimate gripes about code enforcement, but at other times, people are just scoffing the issues and engage in conduct that is clearly illegal, said Vaill.
In retrospect, Miller said, “If we had to do it again, I think there were too many members.”
“Eleven would be best,” he said after experiencing the delays the 17-member committee faced while debating the issues one by one.
The large group created a lot of problems as he attempted to manage personalities, he said.
But overall, “the variety was necessary,” said Miller, who thought the council did a good job at selecting an excellent mix of people from all walks of life.