A call for code enforcement streamlining

By: AARON CLAVERIE - Staff Writer
Wildomar man has been complaining for more than two years about neighboring property | Thursday, February 14, 2008 10:49 PM PST ∞

WILDOMAR ---- A stack of 17 canary yellow, junior legal-size pieces of paper details Gerald Hall's ongoing frustration with county code enforcement, which he contends has dragged its feet cleaning up his next-door neighbor's property.

Since the summer of 2005, the Wildomar resident has documented on those slips of paper each of the 80-plus phone calls he's made to county code enforcement officials, county officials and community activist Tim Underdown.

Hall, 59, a resident of Austin Street, says the county needs to streamline the code enforcement process. He has asked the department repeatedly to force his next door neighbor to clean up her property, which, as recently as last summer, featured a mobile home that Hall called a literal "rat's nest" ---- old cars, three mysterious storage sheds and piles of junk.

When code enforcement did not act fast enough for Hall, he started calling Supervisor Bob Buster's office. When Buster's office didn't step in and spur the code enforcement department to move faster, Hall tried Underdown, who called Buster's office on Hall's behalf.

Code enforcement has responded to many of Hall's complaints, removing in the summer of 2007 a "substandard" mobile home and a vehicle from the property, owned by Sharon Phenis, of Riverside.

Hall's entry on Aug. 22, 2007, reads: "Mobile home removal finally started today."

The next entry, filed on Aug. 24, reads: "Mobile home removal completed today. Still need outside trash, three sheds and a car removed. Ninety-day period for trash expires Oct. 29, 2007. Call (code enforcement official) on Oct. 22 to start follow up on these items."

Brian Black, code enforcement's division manager, said the department is reviewing bids to clean up the rest of the property, which is still blighted by the "items" noted by Hall.

During an interview in front of the Phenis property Tuesday, Hall said he doesn't understand why it has taken this long for the county to remove the rest of the stuff from the property.

"God knows what's in those sheds," he said.

Hall said he believes that, if a huge pile of trash were left on property next door to a county official, it would have been gone a long time ago.

Phenis had lived in the mobile home before it was removed, Hall said. Hall, who has lived in his home for 15 years, said he stopped talking to her about her property after an unpleasant conversation.

Contacted by phone Thursday at the listed number for her Riverside residence, Phenis said the county sent her a letter saying it was going to clean up the property and take away all "that stuff."

Growing audibly agitated after Hall's complaints were mentioned, she said, "I don't have any money! I live on a fixed ... income! They can take the whole property. Goodbye."

The code enforcement department has its own stack of paper regarding the Phenis property. Black said there are six pages of reports detailing the department's efforts to bring the property into compliance.

"We would like our cases to move much quicker than this, but there has been a transition in the last two years in department staffing," Black said.

Talking about the complaint process, Black said that, when someone makes a complaint, it is followed up on by one of the department's officers. If the officer determines that action is required, the property owner is notified; in some instances, multiple times.

If the property owner doesn't rectify the problem, the county sends the case to the county's legal department. If approved there, it is sent to the county Board of Supervisors. While this process unfolds, the owner is given the opportunity to correct any outstanding issues. If, as in the case of the Phenis property, the board signs off on a course of action, the project is sent out to bid. Once awarded, the cleanup can begin.

If Phenis cannot pay for the cleanup, which the department said will cost thousands of dollars, a lien will be placed on her property.

"It's a choice of whether we want to browbeat someone into compliance or encourage them," Black said.

If there are health and safety issues, the department goes full force to clean up a property. The Phenis case, meanwhile, involves an elderly woman who might not be able to afford paying for trash removal.

Buster's chief of staff, Dave Stahovich, said recent budget moves by the board have boosted the budget and staffing for code enforcement, so manpower isn't a problem.

The issue is the process, which has to include the county's legal counsel, he said.

"A code enforcement officer is similar to a police officer," he said. "They're not the judge, jury and executioner. If they notice a violation, it's not necessarily a violation until the court says it's a violation."

Stahovich, while empathizing with Hall's concern, said the case is frustrating for code enforcement, too.

"They don't want to be spending all this time on one case," he said.

On Thursday afternoon, Stahovich said he was told by a code enforcement official this week the property could be cleaned up by the end of the month.

Hall understands there needs to be some sort of process, but he said there's no reason it has to take as long as it has with his complaint.

"The federal government gets things done faster," he said.

Contact staff writer Aaron Claverie at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2624, or aclaverie@californian.com.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.