Item S06
BOARD OF COll~T\' CQM\nSSIONERS
,-\GENDA ITEM SUMMARY
\ 1cetillS Dare ScprenU?cr: 1, 200'::'
lJi ,.i ~iDn
CqWIlt\ ..l.,ll~
Bulk ltem. y ~s
l\" 0 xx.x
Derartm~m. County Anorllcv
Stall C ontaCl PcrSOIl" !"lob Shillinger .\.34 ~O_
AGf~NLlA ITEM ".'ORDI~G:
Pre~ernation of s~ttleHl€nt o~Hions in J/unmj;' ('mmty l'_ f)trk })wnrau, C A K O:'i.()(17~ and authorization
tor staff to St~tt Ie case for $-U -l8 .00.
ITF-\1 BACKGROLND~ The County owns a code enforcemtnt lien again::;t \1r. Damrau's propeny
on !}j~ Pine t\.ev in the amuum of$206_ 100.00. TI1c case began in Julv 1999 wht'n hI'; wa::. noticed ~\'ith
~ - ~ .
a "iolalion lar bui~dlng./repatrillg il fence and land dearing v,.ithout fl pcrmit \\.'hctl mai I to the Londun,
Englalld address the U\\llcr had prodded to the Property Apprai sel"'i u1lice wa:=. [ClUlncd, llotice v.. as
achieved \ ia posting Vr'hen no progre~s v\:a:. reported on obtaining t he perm~t~, the Srecial T\.h::.ter
impuSoed a tlaily ljne of 510000 that commenced running on \larch 21. '2l}Ol On August 4, 20UJ_ the
(\lllllty Attornty' s oftic~ spoke wilh the ow.ner and conti rmed t he e~]stt'fl('C of ttll' lien and tt~c fUnn ing
fi tlC The {)Wllc;l" cured the violations OIl January 14. 2 (}().:.l. 1 {nO days ufler the fine bt'gan funning but
un]v J 64 days. alter h~ spoke \\" tth ll1is ofticc. Ihough the o\...ner achieved compliance in.1 list o~.cr :",
munth.$. he failed to address the outstanding tines at that (Ime.
Upon being n01ifled that suit had been tllcd against him itlAugllst ::::005. he uflered lo sellle the
S=OC,.1 00 OU fine fur S~,,~ OU the <lmOLUlt spent by the Cuunty in COSt5 in institUT~ng thm actioll The
o\\'ncr jus{iti~s his otTer to pel)' only the costs incurred bccau~t he daims to have been rnerd~' repairing. a
ienc.e tnal had been originally permitted in i 995 but had been damaged in Ilurricanc Georg~". . ['hat
offer represent S appro'>.: Imately :2. r 'a of th(;' tutal flne. To dat~_ the County has incurred $90n in
iHl0rllC':..s fees. in iHt.:mpting to enforce rhi~ li~n ill addition to the S568 Jollars in cosh that it has spt'[~t.
This is one oftht Iu$t of the old code enfon.::t;ment hens thai the Board authorized lhe County
Attorney' 5 onicc lO clean up In ::'003. \\.:hdc alllc:g.al nottce requirements were compl ied wit h. at the
code t'nic.)Il:t'rnent l~\"eL cummunication in this cas~ has been complicated by the foreign addre::.s and
tr<l veb of the violator I k did complete the p~rlllitt illg rroce~s ill jUS,t over 5 months after this. ofike
first spoke {O 111m. Thal process included genlng a coordinatton lctter from PY\" S. Using the 164 day
period as a slaniElg. point. a S:OO p<;:'f (la~' fine would total S32_ 800. 00. If the Boar J ke~p,; tu its
Un\\ nttt'1l rule of Soettling these older liens. for ] 00.0_ p1ll~ l:()sts and fee~_ the ~eltlelIlenL tisure should be
S4,74800 {$3,2HD fine - S90(J attorney's fees - $S6t-l OU cost~). tfthe County were to reject all offers
and forge ahead witn the collection litiga{ion. it could expect lO incur an addiliona~ $3500 in attorney -::,
kc-So and (:Osls tu r~nedose a S~06.] 00.00 lit:n On a rrup~r1~' the P AD apprais~d at S 1. l C) l. 422 00.
PREVIOUS RELEYAt\T Bore ACTION"; On 6/1 g/o3, the ROCe authorized collectioll action.
CO\TRACT/AGKEE'-l FYI' CIIA~GES: nfa
STi\.fF RECOl\1 M E~ DA TIONS: R~jt'dion of nffer; counter offc.. to settle at S4.748.00
A.2.enda Summary - \1onroc Count)" \-. Dirk Damrau (Continued 1:
TOTAL COST:
nia
Bl'DGFTEI>; '.es _~\:~...__. '\0
COST TO COlJ_~TY:
n/a
SOl.' Kef: OF n.I-~ us: n/a
RE\'E:~"-a.F.: J-KOIH (T""\G: Ye~ xx
\n
A_\10L'T PER '\IO~TH ll:il Yt"ar n.'a
A PPROVF:IJ BY; County Atty _~ QrvlH/Purchasing _
Risk M(inagemellt
DIYISIOI'; DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
<\cLJ2{liltQ-e o~h~.ln \
John R. Cullins,_ County AttorrJev
[)OCl1'lE~TA TI{)~;
Included
1>"JOl Rel../Llirtd xx
DISPOSlTlO':
"\CE~iI)A ITr\l #-
Rc, l ~c.'d 2.:n"
f