My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/10/1976
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1970's
>
1976
>
3/10/1976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:28:18 AM
Creation date
6/10/2015 4:45:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/10/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
k <br />MR. ADAMS POINTED OUT TO THE BOARD THAT.HE HAS BEEN WORKING WITH <br />THIS CODE IN THE CITY OF VERO BEACH, AND HE DOES NOT FEEL ANYONE HAS BEEN <br />PERSECUTED BECAUSE OF IT. <br />CHAIRMAN SIEBERT ASKED IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHED TO BE HEARD. THERE <br />WERE NONE. . <br />COMMISSIONER SCHMUCKER SAID THAT HE HAS DISCUSSED THIS MATTER AT <br />LENGTH WITH MR. ADAMS A,ND STATED THAT AS AN INDIVIDUAL, HE IS VERY STRONG <br />ON TWO POINTS - HE IS AGAINST TAX INCREASES AND AGAINST BUREAUCRACY, WHICH <br />CAN GET OUT OF HAND. HE CONTINUED THAT HE IS MOST CONCERNED BECAUSE IN THE <br />COUNTY WE ARE STRETCHED OUT FURTHER THAN IN THE CITY AND ASKED MR. ADAMS <br />IF HE HAD THE WHOLE CODE TO WORK WITH, HOW,WOULD HE PROCEED WITH ENFORCING <br />IT IN THE COUNTY. <br />MR. ADAMS REMARKED THAT WE WOULD ATTEMPT TO USE IT TO HELP PEOPLE <br />HELP THEMSELVES. WE WILL START BY CANVASSING AN AREA, AND AS WE MAKE IM- <br />PROVEMENTS OR PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HOUSING, SUBSTANDARD HOUSING WILL HAVE TO <br />BE BROUGHT UP TO CODE BEFORE IT CAN BE OCCUPIED AGAIN. HOWEVER, UNTIL WE <br />HAVE A FULL TIME HOUSING INSPECTOR, THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD POSSIBLY EN- <br />FORCE THIS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, BUT THIS IS A POINT OF BEGINNING. MR. <br />ADAMS CONTINUED THAT HE THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE TO GET FEDERAL FUNDING <br />FOR A HOUSING INSPECTOR; OTHERWISE, IT WILL HAVE TO BE DONE BY FEES AND <br />POINTED OUT THAT HE WILL NEED ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL WHETHER THE CODE IS <br />ADOPTED OR NOT., <br />COMMISSIONER MASSEY STATED THAT HE WAS CONCERNED THAT THE HOUSING <br />CODE WOULD GIVE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT INGRESS AND EGRESS TO PEOPLES HOMES, <br />MR. ADAMS REPLIED THAT THE SUPREME COURT RULED THAT YOU CANNOT <br />INVADE THE PRIVACY OF A MAN S HOME AND STATED THAT THE INSPECTORS ARE SUB- <br />. 4 <br />JECT TO PERSONAL LAWSUIT AND ALSO MUST ASCERTAIN BEFORE THEY MAKE ANY CHARGES <br />THAT THEY ARE FACTUAL. <br />COMMISSIONER $CHMUCKER STATED THAT HE WAS NOT OPPOSED TO THE HODS- <br />ING CODE, BUT WAS OPPOSED TO ADOPTING IT IN ENTIRETY BECAUSE IT GOES INTO <br />SO MANY DETAILS, AND HE WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT ONLY CERTAIN CHAPTERS <br />OF IT BE ADOPTED. <br />MR. ADAMS POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS A "MINIMUM" SET UP AND DOES NOT <br />EVEN MEET THE'STRICTER REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE ALREADY SET UP. <br />19 <br />MAR 10,1976 <br />p�� 1`25 ' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.