The URL can be used to link to this page

11-10-98 Special/Workshop CITY COMMISSION CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA SPECIAL MEETING - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 6: 00 P.M. - FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM AGENDA ADDENDUM SPECIAL ME. ETING AGENDA Pursuant to Section 3.07 of the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Mayor Jay Alperin has instructed me to announce a Special Meeting of the City Commission, to be held for the following purpose: (1) S~ttlement/Younginger v. City et al: Consider settlement of the referenced matter. Alison MacGregOr Harry City Clerk Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City neither provides nor prepares such record. ref:ADDENDUM DELRA~ BE,ACH CITY COMMISSION ,11 WORKSHOP MEETING - NOVEMBER 10, 1998 6:00 P.M. - FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM The City will furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program or activity conducted by the City. Contact Doug Randolph at 243-7127 (voice} or 243-7199 (TDD), 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. WORKSHOP AGENDA (1) Palm Beach County's Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan Implementation (Business Component) - Constance J. Scott, Economic Development Specialist, PBC Division of Emergency Management. (2) Introduction of Mr. Lou Waldmann, Pineapple Grove Main Street's new manager, and status report on the program. (3) Discrimination complaint by Dr. Josh Smith, Jr. (4) Commission comments. Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City neither provides nor prepares such record. [lTV OF DELRI:IY BERI:H CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TELEPHONE 561/243-~090 · FACSIMI~ ~61/278-4755 Writer' ~ l)~rccl Line: ~61 ~ 2~3-7091 DELRAY BEACH AlI.Amdca Ci~ M EMORA N DUM 1993 TO: City Commission FROM: Brian Shutt, Assistant City Attorney SUBJECT: Youngin~v. City of Delray Beach The PlaJntJfl~ Mr. YoungJnger, filed suit as a result of a tra~c stop. This occurred on August 20, 1994. The Plaintiff alleges that as a result of the arrest he injured his back and required surgery that resulted in medical bills totaling approximately $60,000.00 with the possibility of ~ture surge~ fusing together a potion of his spine. The Plaintiff also assefls that he has lost wages in the range of $20,000.00 to $30,000.00. The Plaintiff is asserting batte~ and false arrest against the City. Mr. Younginger, through his attorney, has off, red to settle this case with the City for $100,000.00, which includes all attorney's fees and costs. There remains pending a lawsuit in Federal cou~ against the City arising out of this same incident assening a violation of his constitutional rights. If Mr. Younginger were to prevail in that lawsuit, the $100,000.00 would be an offset to any judgment he received. If the Commission accepts this offer, the City Attorney's O~ce will obtain a complete release from the Plaintiff for his State law claims. Attorneys' for the City and the Ot~cer recommend acceptance of this offer. Our ofl]ce concurs in this recommendation. By copy of this memo to David Harden, City Manager, our ot~ce requests that this matter be placed on the November 10, 1998 City Commission agenda. Please call if you have any questions. Cc: David Harden, City Manager Alison Ha~y, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: David T. Harden, City Manager~// SUBJECT: Addendum & Additional Information for 11/10/98 DATE: November 9, 1998 Enclosed is an addendum for a special meeting prior to tomorrow night's work session. I expect a memorandum from the City Attorney to be delivered to you either prior to or at the meeting. I am also providing additional information concerning item (3) on the workshop agenda. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. DTH/AMH/m Enclosures Palm Beach County Business Alliance Redevelopment Team (BART) The County of Palm Beach is a partner with the Florida Department of Community Affairs through a grant. The project goal is to implement the strategies included in the Palm Beach County Post Disaster Redevelopment Plan (1993) including a public/private partnership to expedite the recovery process for business. The Overall Economic Development Program Committee has agreed to provide overall direction to recovery/redevelopment activities. Working Committees are forming and we are encouraging your business' participation. Frequently asked Questions Q. What Is hazard mitigation? A. Any action taken to reduce potential injury or damage from any type of disaster, natural or man made.: Q. What ara the objectives of the Business Alliance Contract? A. To assist in the development of: · Vendor Services Database · Damage assessment process for business community · Legal and financial remedies for post disaster recovery of business community · Public outreach and education for business community Q. What are the final products of the project that will assure Palm Beach County an expedited and full economic recovery/redevelopment from a disaster? A. The final products include · An established, operating mechanism for intergovernmental coordination · An effective, established mechanism for public/private cooperation and coordination · An evaluation of available local resources, resource gaps and an identification of which state, federal, and other resource agency can fill the gap · Hazard maps for Palm Beach County · A training Manual and presentation materials on pre-disaster roles and procedures related to business, I. E. · A Post Disaster Business Information Guide or Brochure; and · Implementation of the business community mitigation strategy measures. Your participation in the working committees is welcome. For more information, contact Constance Scott 561 355-1680 or Helene Wetherington 561 712-6400 from Palm Beach County Economic Development and Emergency Management Center. -. Palm Beach County's Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan Implementation (Business Component). Overview - A series of actions to be taken by Palm Beach County to serve as a disaster mitigation strategy. The actions are consistent with FEMA's new direction toward building a disaster, resistant community and the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, Local Mitigation Strategy. It is a collaborative public/private sector program to implement business-related mitigation measures contained in the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in 199~. The one- year project is funded by the Department of Community Affairs, State of Florida Competitive Grant Program to assist the County carry out those actions related to the economic recovery of the business community. Objective - Organize and finalize the work program Actions related to: * Creating an organizational structure including pdvate and public sector representation * Finalizing work program Objective, - Establish intergovernmental and private ss<tm' collaboration Ac'dons related to: * Implementing economic recovery actions to assist businesses in reestablishing normal activities and operations as quickly as possible. * Preparing comprehensive vender lists and ~nventodes of necessary equipment, materials and supplies and develop working agreements to take affect after a disaster. * Establishing plans and procedures for creation of business Hotlines and Redevelopment Assistance Centers. Objective - Refine the hazards and vulnerability analysis of the community Actions related to: * Determining how vulnerable a firm i$ to various types of disasters and what steps should be taken to reduce their vulnerability In coordination with the damage assessment process and appropriate federal and state agencies. * Distributing hazard vulnerability Information throughout community Objective - Evaluate local available resources (public and private), identify gaps and develop appropriate funding mechanisms and strategies to fill the gaps Actions related to: * Developing plans to ensure cash flows, establish emergency loan programs, "bridge loans", grants etc. to reopen businesses and reestablish public infrastructure as soon as possible. * Identifying local gaps in resources and outside financial needs and potential sources to meet the needs. Objective . Create a public education and training .program Actions related to: * Training public and private sectors on what can be expected from each other in long-range recovery and what needs to be done to mitigate the impacts of a disaster before and event. * Developing written business information guides describing post-disaster redevelopment procedures and options. GOJ & Associates: 7/98rev NOVEMBER 10, 1998 CITY COMMISSION WORKSHOP (6 issues, 9 variables associated with issues, 5 consensus perceptions, 10 considerations for commission) THE ISSUES 1. ALLEYWAYS / (COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PAVED VS. UNPAVED IN FOUR (4) GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OF THE CITY. 2. CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES (NUISANCE ABATEMENT) / COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FINES ASSESSED AGAINST PROPERTIES LOCATED IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS OF THE CITY VS. FINES ASSESSED AGAINST PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE $:E. & N.E. AREAS OF THE CITY. 3. CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES (BUILDING DEMOLITION/BOARD-UPS) / COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF FINES ASSESSED AGAINST PROPERTIES LOCATED IN S.W. AND N.W. AREAS OF THE CITY VS. FINES ASSESSED AGAINST PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE S.E. & N.E. AREAS OF THE CITY. 4. DISREPAIRED STREETS / COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STREET REPAIRS COMPLETED IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS OF THE CITY VS. STREET REPAIRS COMPLETED IN THE S.E. & N.E. AREAS OF THE CITY. 5. BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FROM DECADE OF EXCELLENCE BOND ISSUE BUDGET (1990 & 1993) / COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ALLOCATED FUNDS FOR PROJECTS IN THE S.W. & N.W. AREAS OF THE CITY VS. THE ALLOCATED FUNDS IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY. 6. PROPERTY LIENS COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (To datethe code enf. dept has failed/refused to provide the requested data for this analysis) 1ST VARIABLE / NUISANCE ABATEMENT FINES $80,260.92 - FINES FOR BLACKS $ 7,607.08 - FINES FOR WHITES BLACKS FINED 955% MORE THAN WHITES 91% OF FINES AGAINST BLACKS 9% OF FINES AGAINST WHITES 2ND VARIABLE / BUILDING DEMOLITION/BOARD-UPS FINES $45,103.00 - FINES FOR BLACKS $ 8,285.00 - FINES FOR WHITES BLACKS FINED 544% MORE THAN WHITES 84% OF FINES AGAINST BLACKS 16% OF FINES AGAINST WHITES 3RD VARIABLE / PAVED ALLEYWAYS 69 ALLEYWAYS IN S.E. & N.E. AREAS (77.53% OF THEIR ALLEYWAYS ARE PAVED) 20 ALLEYWAYS IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS (22.47% OF OUR ALLEYWAYS ARE PAVED) 4TH VARIABLE / UNPAVED ALLEYWAYS 49 ALLEYWAYS IN S.E. & N.E. AREAS (27.07% OF 'I-HEIR ALLEYWAYS ARE PAVED) 132 ALLEYWAYS IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS (72.93% OF OUR ALLEYWAYS ARE UNPAVED) DELRAY HAS PAVED 245% MORE ALLEYWAYS IN THE N.E. & S.E. AREAS THAN IN THE N.W. & S.W. AREAS 5TH VARIABLE ! ALLEYWAYS THAT ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY 77.53% OF ALLEYWAYS IN S.E. & N.E. AREAS ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY 22.47% OF ALLEYWAYS IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY (6TH VARIABLE / ALLEYWAYS THAT ARE NOT MAINTAINED BY THE CITY (PROPERTY OWNERS MUST MAINTAIN THESE ALLEYWAYS BY DOING IT THEMSELVES, PAYING SOMEONETO DO IT OR THE CITY CONTRACTS WITH A VENDOR AND BILLS THE PROPERTY OWNERS EXORBITANT AMOUNTS AND/OR FILE LIENS AGAINST THE PROPERTIES) 27.07% OF ALLEYWAYS IN S.E. & N.E. AREAS ARE NOT MAINTAINED BY THE CITY 72.93% OF ALLEYWAYS IN S.W. & N.W. AREAS ARE NOT MAINTAINED BY THE CITY 7TH VARIABLE / STREET POTHOLES % OF POTHOLES IN N.E. & S.E. AREAS (50%) / % OF POTHOLES REPAIRED (78.4%) % OF POTHOLES IN N.W. & S.W. AREAS (49.5%) / % OF POTHOLES REPAIRED (21.5%) EVEN THOUGH BOTH BLACK & WHITE AREAS HAD APPROXIMATELY THE SAME AMOUNT OF POTHOLES, THERE WERE 265% MORE POTHOLE REPAIRS IN WHITE AREAS THAN IN BLACK AREAS DELRAY HAS REPAIRED 265% MORE POTHOLES IN WHITE AREAS THAN IN BLACK AREAS 8TH VARIABLE / DECADE OF EXCELLENCE BOND ISSUE BUDGET ALLOCATIONS (1990 & 1993) $22,415,033.00 TOTAL BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR PHASE 1 & PHASE 2 $ 3,710,801.14 TOTAL BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR S.W. & N.W. SECTIONS OF THE CITY (16.55%) $18,704,231.86 TOTAL BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY (83.45%) 2 9TH VARIABLE MISSING (LIENS AGAINST PROPERTIES) / CODE ENF. DEPT. FAILED/REFUSED TO PROVIDE REQUESTED INFORMATION FOR THIS ANALYSIS THE AM.OCATIONS FOR OTHER AREAS OFTHE CITY WERE 604% MORE THAN THE ALLOCATIONS FOR THE S.W. AND N,W, AREAS OF THE CITY. THIS APPEARS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPARATIVE PERCENTAGE TRENDS REFLECTED BY ALL VARIABLES ANALYZED TO DATE, BLACKS MAKE UP 23% OF THE POPULATION OF DELRAY (BASED UPON THE LAST CENSUS DATA IN 1990~ BLACKS RECEIVE A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF SERVICES AND FUND REVENUES. (PROPORTIONATELY LESS) BLACKS RECEIVE A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF CHARGES, FINES AND LIENS. (PROPORTIONATELY MORE) The followincl rel3resents the perceptions of black citizens with re_clard to how we have been adversely impacted by the existing inequities and disparities: 1. We have been placed at a comparative financial disadvantage (using fines by non-blacks as a comparative base. 2. We have been subjected to emotional stress and anguish resulting from a lack of what appears to be a lack of equal protection/treatment. 3. Our property values have not been able to appreciated and there is a reluctance of citizens to invest properties located in the S.W. and N.W. geographical areas of the city. 4. Our ability to sell proper[les have been greatly diminished because of the lack of financial ability to pay the liens imposed upon properties by the City of Delray Beach. 5. Many of our properties are worthless because the liens are more than the value of the properties. What we are asking the Commission to give consideration to this evening are as follows: 1. That the gross inequities and disparities be effectively dealt with by the City of Delray Beach taking appropriate measures to insure more equity while simultaneously adequately decreasing the wide ranging disparities. 2. That the continuing citations, fines and property liens (imposed by the code enforcement department and code enforcement board) of citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas of the city be immediately discontinued until such time that relief #1 is accomplished. 3. That the nuisance abatement fines and property liens imposed against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas of the city (which is 955% more than for citizens in the predominantly white geographical areas of the city) be waived as an appropriate reparation effort for decades past racial discrimination against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas. 3 4. That the demolition/board-ups fines and property liens imposed against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas of the city (which is 544% more than for citizens in the predominantly white geographical areas of the city) be waived as an appropriate reparation effort for decades past racial discrimination against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas. 5. That the City Code Enforcement Board (whose members are appointed by ::he Delray Beach City Commission) be diversified to reflect more equitable city ethnic representation. The City Code Enforcement Department presents case~ to the Code Enforcement Board, who subsequently makes decisions on who is to be fined, whose fines will be dismissed, who will be given additior~al time to make corrections and who will have liens placed against their property. This is a seven (7) member all-white board with no minority representation. 6. That the Commission goes on record with regard to putting forth a concerted effort to ensure that blacks will proportionately share in the economic benefits and development, in the expansion of the Downtown Development of West Atlantic Avenue. If the Commission fails to do this, I'm afraid that past trends will prevail and less than 10% of minorities will end up sharing in the economic benefits. 7. That the Commission goes on record with regard to putting forth a concerted effort to ensure that black homeowners will not be forced out of their homes via imminent domain, against their will. If the Commission fails to do this, I'm afraid that past trends will continue to prevail and more minorities will be forced from their homes. 8. That the Commission strongly encourage every city department to develop and implement a method for quantitatively measuring and evaluating its effectiveness. I assume that every department annually evaluates its personnel. Evaluation of city departments is no less important. 9. That the Commission considers appointment of an Ombudsman whose responsibility would be to investigate complaints having racial overtones made by citizens against abuses or capricious acts cf public officials. Cedainly when disparities reach this proportion, abuses have occurred and there is not presently an impartial body nor person to investigate such complaints, including the C;~y Commission. 10. That what appears to be a conflict of interest be immediately discontinued. I observed the proceedings of the City Code Enforcement Board on August 11, 1998 and a one "David $chmidt, who is an attorney and a member of the Delray Beach City Commission, appeared before the board representing a client who had been cited by the Code Enforcement Board. His client was in violation of a board order and Mr, Schmidt was asking for an additional amount of time of 30 days. The board granted additional time of 60-90 days. This is nothing personal against Mr. Schmidt, but with Mr. Schmidt being a City Commissioner, he should not be appearing before any City Boards representing clients. His position as City Commission would be viewed as too influential which would give his clients a distinct advantage over other citizens who may have been cited. BLACK CITIZENS COALITION Attached is a copy of the discrimination complaint submitted by Dr. Josh Smith, Jr., together with a copy of the analysis prepared by the Code Enforcement Division. While Dr. Smith's complaint speaks of Code Enforcement "fines", his analysis is of nuisance abatement liens. Nuisance abatement liens result from the costs incurred by the city for maintaining property which is not maintained by the owner, even after notice that maintenance is needed. A copy of our nuisance abatement procedure is also enclosed. The relief sought by Dr. Smith is listed on page 5 and 6 of his complaint. In my view, Dr. Smith has not offered any substantial evidence of discrimination is administration of the city's nuisance abatement program. Item 2 would mean that the city would stop enforcing minimum property maintenance standards in the predominately black areas of the city. I think such action would be grossly unfair to the residents of the area. Number 3 would mean that the taxpayers of the city would pay the cost of maintaining private properties, most of which have absentee owners. That is not an appropriate use of tax dollars. Numbers 4 and 5 are policy issues for the Commission. We will have more information to distribute on Monday. RACIAL DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT SUBMI3-rED BY JOSH SMITH, JR. ~l~ 3616 AVENUE DEGIEN · DELRAY BEACH, FL 33445 '~. HOME PHONE (561) 498-7220 HOME FAX (561) 498-9530 THE CITY OF DEl RAY BEACH, FL DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BLACK CITIZENS WITH REGARD TO THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: 1. THE COMPARATIVE PERCENTAGE OF UNPAVED ALLEYS IN THE AREAS OF THE CITY INHABITED BY BLACK CITIZENS. I CONTEND THAT THIS IS A RESULT OF RACISM IN DECADES PAST. CONSEQUENTLY, BLACK RESIDENTS ARE CITED AND FINED BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT SIGNIFICANTLY AND DISPROPORTIONATELY MORE THAN NON-BLACK CITIZENS. CITIZENS RESIDING IN THE PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AREAS OF THE CITY HAVE BEEN FINED 955% MORE THAN CITIZENS RESIDING IN THE PREDOMINANTLY WHITE AREAS OF THE CITY. UNIMPROVED/UNPAVED ALLEYS S.E. & N.E. SECTIONS [WHITE] 49 UNIMPROVED ALLEYS 27.07% UNIMPROVED S.W. & N.W. SECTIONS [BLACK] 132 UNIMPROVED ALLEYS 72.93% UNIMPROVED IMPROVED/PAVED ALLEYS S.E. & N.E. SECTIONS [WHITE] 69 IMPROVED ALLEYS 77.53% IMPROVED S.W. & N.W. SECTIONS [BLACK] 20 IMPROVED ALLEYS 22.47% IMPROVED 2. THE COMPARATIVE AMOUNT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES ASSESSED AGAINST CITIZENS PRESIDING IN THE PREDOMINANT BLACK AREAS OF THE CITY. PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREAS OF UNIMPROVED/UNPAVED ALLEYS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING AND CLEANING THE ALLEY FROM THE CENTER OF THE ALLEY UP TO THEIR PROPERTY LINE WHICH AVERAGES 8-12 FEET. THIS INCLUDES PLANT GROWTH THAT SOMETIMES AVERAGE 4-5 FEET IN HEIGHT. PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREAS OF IMPROVED/PAVED ALLEYS HAVE THE LUXURY OF THE CITY MAINTAINING THE PAVED SECTION OF THE ALLEY. THIS LEAVES THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS WITH APPROXIMATELY I FOOT OF MAINTENANCE, WHICH USUALLY CONSISTS OF SMALL PLANT GROWTH WITH PERHAPS AN AVERAGE HEIGHT OF 12 INCHES. CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES IMPOSED ON CITY RESIDENTS IN PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AREAS OF THE CITY VERSUS CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES IMPOSED ON CITY RESIDENTS IN PREDOMINANTLY WHITE AREAS. THIS DATA IS BASED ON AN ANALYSIS OF DATA REQUESTED AND RECEIVED FROM THE CITY MANAGER % OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS WITH CURRENT FINES BALANCES [BLACK] 91% % OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS WITH CURRENT FINES BALANCES [WHITE] 09% TOTAL FINES OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS (98 CITATIONS) [BLACK] $80,280.92 TOTAL FINES OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS (22 CITATIONS) [WHITE] $ 7,607.08 AVERAGE FINES BALANCE OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS [BLACK] $ 818.98 AVERAGE FINES BALANCE OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS [WHITE] $ 345.77 N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS HAVE BEEN CITED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT & FINED 955% MORE THAN N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS, BASED UPON THE CURRENT BALANCES ON PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED BY N.E, S.E, N.W. AND S.W.ADDRESSES. 3. THE COMPARATIVE BREAKDOWN REFLECTING THAT IN THE PAST THREE YEARS, THE CITY-HAS PAVED THREE TIMES AS MANY STREETS IN WHITE AREAS AS IN BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH REFLECTS WHO HAD POTHOLES AND WHO GOT POTHOLES REPAIRED. HAVING TO DRIVE ON ROADS HEAVILY LADEN WITH POTHOLES RESULTS IN COMPARATIVELY MORE WEAR AND TEAR ON VEHICLES (i.e. wheel balancing, alignments, replacement of shock absorbers etc.). THIS MEANS MORE OUT-OF-POCKET EXPENSES FOR SUCH CITIZENS. THIS DATA WAS PUBLISHED IN THE MARCH 22, 1998 EDITION OF THE PALM BEACH POST NEWSPAPER AND THE SOURCES WERE U.S. CENSUS; DELRAY BEACH CITY RECORDS. SHARE OF POTHOLES SHARE OF POTHOLES REPAIRED WEST (92% WHITE) 8.8% 13.7% NORTH (98% WHITE) 2.2% 9.8% N.W. (94% BLACK) 27.6% 7.8% S.W. (98% BLACK) 21.9% 13.7% SOUTH (94% WHITE) 4.8% 0% N.E. (74% WHITE) 19.3% 9.8% S.E. (98% WHITE) 13.6% 23.5% COAST (99% WHITE) 1.8% 21.6% TOTALS 100% 99.9% PREDOMINANT WHITE AREA POTHOLES PREDOMINANT WHITE AREA POTHOLE REPAIRS 5O.5% 78.4% PREDOMINANT BLACK AREA POTHOLES PREDOMINANT BLACK AREA POTHOLE REPAIRS 49.5% 21.5% EVEN THOUGH BOTH BLACK AND WHITE AREAS HAD APPROXIMATELY THE SAME AMOUNT OF POTHOLES~ THERE WERE 265% MORE POTHOLE REPAIRS IN THE PREDOMINANTLY WHITE AREAS THAN THERE WERE IN THE PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AREAS. The mayor of Delray Beach conceded that affluent areas may get preferential treatment because people in those areas speak up. '3'oo often you go to the squeaky wheel." Mr. David Harden, city manager of Delray Beach agreed that some major streets through African-American neighborhoods are "an embarrassment." Delray Beach became an Ali-American City in 1993, largely because of its comprehensive program to t'~ up public facilities. While there are more potholes in poorer areas with large minority populations, there has ben more paving in wealthier areas where few minorities live. Repair needs are greater where minorities live, but most of the work has been done in white neighborhoods. SOURCE: PALM BEACH POST - APRIL 1, 1998 EDITION. The predominance of black citizens in Delray Beach, FL reside in the S.W. and N.W. geographical areas of the city. On Auqust 28, 1992 , I corresponded with Ms. Lula Butler, Director of Community Development. Following are some inquiries that I made to Ms. Butler: OVER THE YEARS I HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY CITED FOR GRASS AND WEEDS EXCEEDING ALLOWABLE HEIGHT IN THE ALLEYWAY BEHIND MY TWO PROPERTIES, AS WELL AS LITTER AND DEBRIS THAT MYSTERIOUSLY KEEP APPEARING IN THE ALLEYWAY. MANY YEARS AGO I FENCED IN MY PROPERTY AND THIS AREA IS BEYOND MY FENCE. I HAVE RECENTLY BEEN CITED AGAIN FOR THE SAME INFRACTION AND DECIDED TO MAKE SOME INQUIRIES. IN CONFERRING WITH A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, I RELATED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AND POSED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: STATEMENT: I HAVE NOTICED THAT IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CITY, CITY CREWS ASSUMED THE RESPONSiBIUTY OF SERVICING THE ALLEYWAYS BEHIND PERSONAL AND BUSINESS PROPERTIES, BUT THESE PARTS OF THE CITY SEEMED TO BE LOCATED PRIMARILY IN THE SOUTHEASTERN AND NORTHEASTERN SECTIONS OFTHE CITY. WHAT CRITERIA DOES THE CITY USE TO DETERMINE WHICH ALLEYWAYS ARE SERVICED BY THE CITY AND WHICH ALLEYWAYS ARE NOT SERVICED BY THE CITY. OFFICER'S RESPONSE: THOSE ALLEYWAYS THAT ARE PAVED ARE THE ONES THAT CITY CREWS SERVICE, AND THOSE THAT ARE NOT PAVED ARE THE ONES THAT CITY CREWS DO NOT SERVICE. MY RESPONSE: SINCE THE CITIZEN'S DO NOT CONTROL WHICH ALLEYWAYS THE CITY DECIDES TO PAVE AS OPPOSED TO NOT PAVING, THIS SEEMS INHERENTLY UNFAIR TO TAX PAYING CITIZENS WHO UVE IN THE AREAS THAT THE CITY DID NOT SEE FIT TO PAVE THE ALLEYWAYS. I FEEL THAT I PAY MY FAIR SHARE OF TAXES, HOWEVER I AM BEING PENAMZED BECAUSE OF THE AREA THAT MY PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED IN. IT DOES NOT SEEM THAT I SHOULD HAVE TO PAY SOMEONE TO CONTINUALLY CUT WEEDS ETC.IN THE ALLEYWAY BEHIND MY PROPERTY WHEN CERTAIN OTHER CITIZENS WITHIN THE CITY DO NOT HAVE THIS OBEGATION. IT APPEARS THAT THE CITIZENS WHO CAN LEAST AFFORD THE EXTRA EXPENSE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE BEING SADDLED WITH THIS RESPONSIBIETY, WHILE THE ONES WHO CAN MOST AFFORD THE EXTRA EXPENSES ARE THE ONES WHO DO NOT HAVE THIS RESPONSIBILITY. SOMEHOW THIS SEEMS TO BE A GROSS INEQUITY THAT DOES NOT AFFORD ALL CITIZENS EQUAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW. OFFICER'S RESPONSE: I DON3' KNOW WHY THIS IS THE CASE. YOU'LL HAVE TO POSE THAT QUESTION TO CITY ADMINISTRATORS, PERHAPS MRS. LULA BUTLER. THESE ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH I AM REMANDING THESE CONCERNS TO YOU. PERHAPS THERE ES SOME LOGICAL REASON FOR THE EXISTING INEQUITIES AND I SIMPLY AM NOT AWARE OF THEM. I AM CONSIDERING THIS AN APPEAL TO YOU AND AM REQUESTING THAT A FINAL DECISION ON THE CODE VIOLATIONS BE POSTPONED UNTIL I RECEIVE A RESPONSE FROM YOU, 3 WITH REGARD TO THE AFOREMENTIONED CIRCUMSTANCES. To date, I ..have not received a response to my in..quiries and concerns. On April 7, 1997, I requested and received an ALLEY STATUS MAP which identified all improved and unimproved alleys within the following four geographical areas (N.E., S.E., N.W. AND S.W.). I analyzed the map and did a comparative analysis on the UNIMPROVED AND IMPROVED Al I ;YS. The map was plotted by a one MICKLA at 14:45:32 (2:45pm). The following data represents my analytical findings: UNIMPROVED ALLEYS S.E. & N.E. SECTIONS 49 UNIMPROVED Al/FYS 27.07% UNIMPROVED S.W. & N.W. SECTIONS 132 UNIMPROVED ALLEYS 72.93% UNIMPROVED IMPROVED ALLEYS S.E. & N.E. SECTIONS 69 IMPROVED ALLEYS 77.53% IMPROVED S.W. & N.W= SECTIONS 20 IMPROVED ALLEYS 22.47% IMPROVED After my analysis of the ALLEY STATUS MAP revealed that 77.53% of the alleys in the N.E. AND S.E. sections of the city were IMPROVED/PAVED and that 72.93% of the alleys in the N.W. AND S.W. sections of the city were UNIMPROVED/UNPAVED, I asked the following question: WHAT WERE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES ASSESSED AGAINST CITIZENS IN THE S.W. AND N.W. SECTIONS OF THE CITY COMPARED WITH THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES ASSESSED AGAINST CITIZENS IN THE S.E. AND N.E. SECTIONS OF THE CITY? City officials failed/refused to provide me with an answer. I then requested the names and addresses of all citizens with outstanding fines balances. I made this request directly to the city manager, Mr. David Harden. He complied with my request and sent me a computer printout consisting of 129 pages. I ANALYZED THE DATA AND FOLLOWING REPRESENTS MY ANALYTICAL FINDINGS: % OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS WITH CURRENT FINES BALANCES 91% % OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS WITH CURRENT FINES BALANCES 09% TOTAL FINES OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS (98 CITATIONS) $80,260.92 TOTAL FINES OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS (22 CITATIONS) $ 7,607.08 AVERAGE FINES BALANCE OF N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS $ 818.98 AVERAGE FINES BALANCE OF N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS $ 345.77 N.W. & S.W. CITIZENS HAVE BEEN CITED & FINED 955% MORE THAN N.E. & S.E. CITIZENS, BASED UPON THE CURRENT BALANCES ON PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED BY N.E. S.E. N.W. AND S.W.ADDRESSES. 4 I have tried to cooperatively work with city officials in addressing and resolving these discriminatory factors, each of which is wide ranging in disparities and each of which is grossly disproportionate. All of my attempts have been futile and obviously ignored. Please find enclosed copies of correspondence to: 1. Ms. Lula Butler (Director of Community Development / Deiray Beach, FL) (**Enclosure 1'*) 2. The City Commission / Delray Beach, FL (**Enclosure 2**) 3. Ms. David Harden (City Manager / Delray Beach, FL) (** Enclosure 3**) I have exhausted all avenues available to me within the city hierarchy to no avail, therefore I felt strongly compelled to file this complaint against the City of Delray Beach, FL. HARM DONE RESULTING FROM DISCRIMINATION 1. Comparative financial disadvantage (using fines by non-blacks as a comparative base. 2. Emotional stress and anguish resulting from a lack of what appears to be a lack of equal protection/treatment. 3. Decreased property values and the reluctance of citizens to invest in the S.W. and N.W. geographical areas of the city. 4. Diminished ability to sell properties because of the lack of financial ability to pay the liens imposed upon properties by the City of Delray Beach. RELIEF SOUGHT AS A RESULT OF THIS COMPLAINT 1. That the gross inequities and wide ranging disparities be effectively dealt with by the City of Delray Beach taking appropriate measures to insure more equity while simultaneously adequately decreasing the wide ranging disparities. 2. That the continuing citations, fines and property liens (imposed by the code enforcement department and code enforcement board) of citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas of the city be immediately discontinued until such time that relief #1 is accomplished. 3. That the fines and property liens imposed against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas of the city (which is 955% more than for citizens in the predominantly white geographical areas of the city) be waived as an appropriate reparation effort for decades past racial discrimination against citizens in the predominantly black geographical areas. 4. That the City Code Enforcement Board (whose members are appointed by the Delray Beach City Commission) be diversified to reflect more equitable city ethnic representation. The City Code Enforcement Department presents cases to the Code Enforcement Board, who subsequently makes decisions on who is to be fined, whose fines will be dismissed, who will be given additional time to make corrections and who will have liens placed against their property. This is a seven (7) member all-white board with no minority representation. 5. That what appears to be a conflict of interest be immediately discontinued. I observed the proceedings of the City Code Enforcement Board on August 11, 1998 and a one "David Schmidt, who is an attorney and a member of the D®iray Beach City Commission, appeared before the board representing a client who had been cited by the Code Enforcement Board. His client was in violation of a board order and Mr. Schmiclt was asking for an additional amount of time of 30 days. The board .qranted additional time of 60-90 days· With Mr. Schmidt being a City Commission, he should not be appearing before any City Boards representing clients. His position as City Commission would be viewed as too influential which would give his clients a distinct advantage over other citizens who may have been cited. Memorandum TO: Lula Butler, Community Improvement Director FROM: Richard Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator SUBJECT: ANALYSIS OF CUSTOMER MASTER FILE HISTORY DATED AUGUST 17, 1998 DATE: October 5, 1998 The scope of the analysis was to examine Code Enforcement files for customers owing $500 or more included on subject listing. We located 1057 files supporting the balances due. I can not report with absolute certainty the exact amount of files supporting 100% of the balance due since it is very difficult and time consuming to tie our early files into computer records. I can report that there are at least 29 files we could not readily locate (22 of the missing files involve vacant/abandoned property). I believe, if we keep searching, more of the "missing" files can be found. The total amount owed from the customers within the scope of our analysis was approximately $403,000.00. About 41% of the amount owed is attributable to demolitions and/or board-ups and the remainder to nuisance abatements and abandoned vehicle removals. All of the quantities, amounts and percentage I will report are approximations. Our review of the files did not produce any unexpected results. The test (1057 cases) involved 160 properties, 74% of which are now vacant and/or abandoned. According to Palm Beach County information, 80% of the properties in our test have delinquent property taxes. As noted above, the total amount outstanding for the test was $403,000, $166,000 of which is for demolitions and/or board ups and $237,000 is for nuisance abatements and abandoned vehicle removals. About 87% of the amount outstanding for nuisance abatements and abandoned vehicles pertains to vacant and/or abandoned properties. Only about $4,000 (or 2%) of the amount due for nuisance abatements and abandoned vehicles relates to services provided at homestead properties. Lula Butler October 5, 1998 Page Two Further, of the files we reviewed, 89% related to vacant and/or abandoned properties and only 1% related to homestead properties. Combining some of the key data produces this expected result: 74% of the properties in the test are now vacant and/or abandoned and accounted for 89% of the nuisance abatement and/or abandoned vehicle cases and 87% of the amount outstanding for such cases. Only 3% of the properties in the test were homestead and those properties accounted for 1% of the nuisance abatement and/or abandoned vehicle cases and 2% of the amount due for such cases. Of the 115 customers (actuall property owners) in the test, only 5 or 4%, had homestead at the properties where services were provided. At least 58% of the customers had addresses outside the City limits while another 38% had Delray addresses but either not at the property where services were provided or not homesteaded at the service location. The services provided were mowing, trash removal, tree trimming and removal, towing abandoned vehicles, treating filthy swimming pools as well as correcting unsafe conditions such as demolishing and boarding up structures. Geographically, the properties in the test fall into the following areas: AREA I AREA II West Atlantic to Lake Ida Road West Atlantic to SW 10th between between Congress and Swinton. Congress and Swinton 30% 43% AREA III AREA IV SW 10th St. to Linton Blvd. between Southeast to Linton Congress and Swinton/Dixie 13% 9% The remaining 5% are in other areas. As I previously explained, since the appropriate alley and right-of-way areas constitute part of a lot by city ordinance, we do not separate expenses for work done on a right-of-way, alley or other portion of a lot when the areas are done as part of a single job. Lula Butler '- October 5, 1998 Page Three If only a right-of-way or alley was cleaned or mowed, the expenses would be so identified. Of the 1,057 files reviewed, I located 23 files which indicated work done only either in an alley area or in a right-of-way area or in both -- but not on other parts of the property. Only 3 of the 23 aforementioned files pertained to work done exclusively in an alley area. The attached tables present other data from the file review. We have organized the files examined by customer number with detailed work sheets indicating what we noted from each file reviewed. Since the accounts receivable listing is by name, there have already been changes with respect to payments, write-offs and property transfers (by tax deeds or reverting to Palm Beach County). RB:mh Section 100.20 ABATEMENT PROCEDURES Section 100.20 INSPECTION OF LANDS TO DETERMINE VIOLATION. The City Manager or his designated representative shall, as often as may be necessary, inspect lands within the city to determine if violation of this chapter exist. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-16(a)) (Ord. No. 79-81, passed 12/8/81; Am. Ord. No. 20-82, passed 3/23/82; Am. Ord. No. 75-83, passed 11/22/83; Am. Ord. No. 59-85, passed 6/25/85) Section 100.21 NOTICE OF VIOLATION REOUIRED, If the City Manager or his designated representative shall determine that a public nuisance exists in accordance with the standards set forth in these sections on any lot, tract, parcel or other real property within the City, whether improved or unimproved, he shall forthwith notify the owner of the property as the ownership appears upon the last complete records of the County Tax Assessor. The notice shall be given in writing by first class mail, postage prepaid, which shall be effective and complete when properly addressed as set forth above and deposited in the United States mail with postage prepaid, and shall be considered sufficient notice. In case of multiple or joint ownership, service as herein provided on any one owner shall be sufficient. The personal delivery by the City Manager or his designated representative in lieu of mailing shall be equivalent to mailing. In the event that the mailed notice is returned by the postal authorities, the City Manager or his designated representative shall cause a copy of the notice to be served upon the occupant of the property or upon any agent of the owner thereof. In the event that personal service upon the occupant of the property or upon any agent of the owner thereof cannot be performed after reasonable search, the notice shall be given by a physical posting of the notice on the subject property. (B) Alternatively, City Code Enforcement officers may issue a warning notice in person or by first class mail to the person who committed the violation, which notice shall specify the section of the Code of Ordinances which is being violated and the required correction date. In the event the violation enumerated on the warning notice is not corrected as specified, a Code Enforcement officer may issue a County Court Citation pursuant to Chapter 37 of the Code of Ordinances, or proceed as set forth in this chapter. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-16(a)) (Ord. No. 79-81, passed 12/8/81; Am. Ord. No. 20-82, passed 3/23/82; Am. Ord. No. 75-83, passed 11/22/83; Am. Ord. No. 59-85, passed 6/25/85; Am. Ord. No. 15-95, passed 3/7/95) IX.132 Section 100.22 SeG~ion 100,22 CONTENT AND FORM OF NOTICE. (A) The notice provided for in Sec. 100.21 shall notify the owner of the land of the following: (1) It has been determined that a public nuisance exists on the land, and what constitutes that nuisance. (2) The owner of the land shall have ten days (42 days in the case of violation of Sec. 100.04 pertaining to seawalls) from the date of the notice to remove the condition causing the nuisance on the land. (3) If the conditions are not corrected or removed, the city shall have them corrected or removed at the expense of the owner, including all costs of inspection and administration. (4) The initial notice of public nuisance violation shall include the estimated cost of removal by the city, exclusive of interest, collection costs or attorney's fees. (5) The owner shall have ten (10) days from the date of the notice of public nuisance to file a written petition to the City Manager or his designee for a hearing before a three-person board which shall be composed of the City Manager, the Director of Public Works or the City Engineer, and the Director of Parks and Recreation, or their designees, which hearing shall be held within ten (10) days of the date that the petition is received by the City Manager. (6) The issues to be determined at the hearing are whether the conditions do in fact exist and why the conditions should not be abated by the city at the expense of the owner, and the time limits for the abatement. The source of the condition shall not be a defense against the requirement that the condition shall be abated by the owner. IX. 133 Sect/on 100.22(&)(7) (7) If after a public hearing the board determines that the conditions which exist on a property constitute a public nuisance, the owner of the property shall have a reasonable time, as determined by the board, to correct or remove the conditions after which the city shall have the right to have the conditions abated at the expense of the property owner. If the owner has not requested a hearing within ten days, the city shall have the right to have the objectionable condition corrected or removed at the expense of the owner. If the city has the condition abated and payment is not received within thirty (30) days after the mailing of a notice of assessment for the cost of the work together with all costs of inspection and administration, the city shall have a lien placed against the property for the cost of the work, including inspection and administrative costs, plus interest at the rate of eight percent (8%), plus reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collecting the sums, without further hearing by the board or Commission and without further notice of the recording of said lien. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-16(b)) (Ord. No. 79-81, passed 12/8/81; Am. Ord. No. 20-82, passed 3/23/82; Am. Ord. No. 75-83, passed 11/22/83; Am. Ord. No. 59-85, passed 6/25/85; Am. Ord. No. 41-89, passed 7/25/89) IX.134 Section 100.23 Section 100.23 HEARING. (A) The owner of the property shall have the right, within ten days from the date of the notice of public nuisance provided for in this chapter, to file a written petition with the City Manager or his representative for a hearing before a three-person board composed of the City Manager, the Director of Public Works or City Engineer, and the Director of Parks and Recreation, or their designees, which hearing shall be held within ten days of the date the petition is received by the City Manager. (B) The issues to be determined at the hearing are whether the conditions'do in fact exist and why the conditions should not be abated by the city at the expense of the owner, and the time limits for the abatement. The source of the condition shall not be a defense against the requirement that the condition shall be abated by the owner. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-18) (Ord. No. 79-81, passed 12/8/81; Am. Ord. No. 20-82, passed 3/23/82) Section 100.24 ABATEMENT BY THE CITY. (A) If after a hearing, as provided for in Sec. 100.23, the board determines that the conditions which exist on the property constitute a public nuisance, the owner of the property shall have a reasonable time, as determined by the board, to remove or correct the conditions, after which the city, through the city administration or agents or contractors hired by the city administration, shall have the right to have the conditions abated at the expense of the property owner. If the owner has not requested a hearing within ten days, the city, through the city administration or agents or contractors hired by the city administration, shall have the right to have the objectionable condition corrected or removed at the expense of the owner. If the city has the condition abated and payment is not received within thirty (30) days after the mailing of a notice of assessment for the work together with all costs of inspection and administration, the city shall file a lien against the property for the actual cost of the work, inspection and administrative costs, interest at the rate of eight percent (8%), plus reasonable attorney's fees, and other costs of collecting the sums, without further hearing by the board or the City Commission and without further notice to the property owner. IX.137 Sect±on 100.24(B) (B) Nothing herein shall be constructed to prevent the city administration from exercising its discretion to increase or decrease charges based on costs or bid considerations or utilizing means other than that contemplated in the notice provided for in this section to abate the condition violative of this chapter. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-19) (Ord. No. 69-78, passed 10/9/78; Am. Ord. No. 79-81, passed 12/8/81; Am. Ord. No. 20-82, passed 3/23/82; Am. Ord. No. 75-83, passed 11/22/83; Am. Ord. No. 41-89, passed 7/25/89) Section 100.25 ABATEMENT BID PROCEDURE. The city shall obtain competitive bids pursuant to the city's normal bidding, purchasing and contracting requirements at intervals no less than yearly for services entailed in carrying out the abatement of nuisances under this chapter. The successful bidder shall be required to provide insurance and bonding as the city deems advisable. ('80 Code, Sec. 13-20) (Ord. No. 75-83, passed 11/22/83; Am. Ord. No. 10-86, passed 2/11/86; Am. Ord. No. 41-89, passed 7/25/89) Section 100.26 ASSESSMENT OF COSTS. INTEREST AND ATTORNEY'S FEES: LIEN. As soon after the abatement as feasible, the City Manager shall report to the City Commission the cost of the abatement, including the cost of inspection and administration. Thereafter, the Commission shall by resolution assess the cost against the subject parcel. This resolution shall describe the property assessed, show the actual cost of abatement, costs of inspection and administration, and indicate that the assessment shall bear interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum plus, if collection proceedings are necessary, that the property owner would be required to pay the cost of the proceedings including a reasonable attorney's fee. This resolution shall become effective thirty (30) days from the date of adoption, and the assessment contained therein shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing date of the notice of assessment. In the event that payment has not been received within thirty (30) days after the mailing date of the notice of assessment, the City Clerk shall record a certified copy of the resolution in the public records of the county, and file a lien on the property, which shall become effective on the subject property to secure the actual cost of abatement, costs of inspection and administration, collection costs and a reasonable attorney's fee without further notice to the property owner. At the time the City Clerk sends the notice of assessment, the following notice shall also be mailed to the property owner in substantially the following form: IX.138 MEMOR&NDUbi TO: City Commission FROM: David T. Harden, City Managerb~7~/I SUBJECT: Geographic Distribution of Code Enforcement Efforts DATE: November 9, 1998 Attached are two reports which analyze the geographic distribution of Code Enforcement cases for fiscal 1998. In my view, these statistics reflect a consistent effort to enforce our codes throughout the entire City. This is contrary to some of Dr. Smith's allegations. Please call if you have any questions about this information. DTH:kwg Attachments Memorandum TO: David Harden, City Manager THRU' Lula Butler, Community Improvement Director FROM' Richard Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator SUBJECT: CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE DISTRIBUTION FOR SAMPLE PERIOD 10/1/97 - 9/30/98 DATE: November 9, 1998 For the period 10/1/97 to 9/30/98, we sampled 569 cases presented to the Code Enforcement Board for action including initial formal hearing, re-hearing, request for time extension and fine reduction, fine assessment and dismissal for compliance or other legitimate reason. To analyze outstanding fines would require more time because we would have to examine and analyze each fine assessment, fine reduction and dismissal case to determine when fines were initially assessed, when liens were initially recorded or released or reduced, etc. Fines and liens are cumulative and could date back five or more years. Also, when examining the number of cases, it should be remembered that the same case could be presented to the Board several times, i.e., for initial, fine assessment, rehearing, etc. purposes. We did not adjust any figures for multiple presentations of the same case. AREA 1: East Atlantic Avenue to North Boundary between North Swinton Avenue and Intracoastal Landscape Related 36 6.33% General and Housing Codes 58 10.19% Nuisances 6 1.05% TOTALS 100 17.57% David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Two AREA 2: Lake Ida Road to North Boundary between North Swinton Avenue and 1-95 Landscape Related 0 0% General and Housing Codes 5 .88% Nuisances 3 .53% TOTALS 8 1.41 % AREA 3: West Atlantic Avenue to Lake Ida Road between North Swinton and 1-95 Landscape Related 27 4.75% General and Housing Codes 29 5.10% Nuisances 13 2.28% TOTALS 69 12.13% AREA 4: SW Tenth Street to West Atlantic Avenue between South Swinton Avenue and 1-95 Landscape Related 67 11.78% General and Housing Codes 92 16.17% Nuisances 8 1.41 % TOTALS 167 29.36% AREA 5: Lake Ida Road to North Boundary between 1-95 and Military Trail Landscape Related 0 0% General and Housing Codes 3 .53% Nuisances 0 0% TOTALS 3 .53% David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Three AREA 6: West Atlantic Avenue to Lake Ida Road between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Boundary Landscape Related 5 .88% General and Housing Codes 26 4.57% Nuisances 11 1.93% TOTALS 42 7.38% AREA 7: East of Intracoastal Landscape Related 3 .53% General and Housing Codes 17 2.99% Nuisances 0 0% TOTALS 20 3.52% AREA 8: Linton Boulevard to West Atlantic Avenue between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Boundary Landscape Related 6 1.05% General and Housing Codes 21 3.69% Nuisances 3 .53% TOTALS 30 ~ 5.27% AREA 9: South Boundary to Linton Boulevard between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Landscape Related 2 .35% General and Housing Codes 3 .53% Nuisances 0 0% TOTALS 5 .88% David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Four AREA 10: Linton Boulevard to SW Tenth Street between South Swinton/OId Dixie and 1-95 Landscape Related 2 .35% General and Housing Codes 20 3.51% Nuisances 16 2.81% TOTALS 38 6.67% AREA 11: Old Dixie Highway to 1-95 between South Boundary and Linton Boulevard Landscape Related 2 .35% General and Housing Codes 9 1.58% Nuisances 1 .18% TOTALS 12 2.11% AREA 12: South Boundary to East Atlantic between Intracoastal and Old Dixie North Swinton Avenue Landscape Related 31 5.45% General and Housing Codes 41 7.21% Nuisances 3 .53% TOTALS 75 13.19% RB:mh Memorandum TO: David Harden, City Manager THRU: Lula Butler, Community Improvement Director FROM: Richard Bauer, Code Enforcement Administrator SUBJECT: CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE DISTRIBUTION FOR SAMPLE PERIOD 10/1/97 - 9/30/98 DATE: November 9,1998 The following statistics concerning cases established in the Code Enforcement computer system are approximations for the sample period tested: AREA 1: East Atlantic Avenue to North Boundary between North Swinton Avenue and Intracoastal ~:~!:.~.: ,,.:.~. :.: ~:~ ,.--., .,.., '- ~ :::.::;::.~:::::¢, ~!' ~ ' " ~ ~: ;~;'; ' ~"~" ¢'"'""~"';'~':";':"~" ......... ' .......~ Abandoned Vehicles 144 693 20.7% General Codes 337 1456 23.1% Landscape Related 75 193 38.9% Nuisance Abatement 589 2630 22.4% Housing Code 26 230 11.3% Unsafe Code 4 34 11.8% Occupational License 39 166 23.5% Sign Code 19 88 21.6% Court Citation Warnings 19 36 52.8% Animal Control 3 31 9.7% Browning-Ferris 77 526 14.6% TOTAL CASES 1332 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 21.9% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Two AREA 2: Lake Ida Road to North Boundary between North Swinton Avenue and 1-95 Abandoned Vehicles 20 693 2.9% General Codes 100 1456 6.9% Landscape Related -0- 193 -0-% Nuisance Abatement 346 2630 13.2% Housing Code 5 230 2.2% Unsafe Code -0- 34 -0-% Occupational License 2 166 1.2% Sign Code -0- 88 -0-% Court Citation Warnings 4 36 11.1% Animal Control 1 31 3.2% Browning-Ferris 91 526 17.3% TOTAL CASES 569 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 9.4% of the cases in the sample. AREA 3: West Atlantic Avenue to Lake Ida Road between North Swinton and 1-95 .::.~>~*:~>x~-:~.::.>~.>>:.~:.~x<<~.;:~>~:--.:~:..~:~:~$~:.:.>>:~;~;~:~;~.~*~.:.~;~:~:.~:.:.:~:``~;~<~:~:~;::.:.:~x<.:.:~:<~-~<.:~.:~:~+~ ~.~.~.j ~,~-->.:--~- ~--.-~ -.;~-..~.;.,, ~.~j- ~-.-~.-- ~-~.::;;~.~ - -- ~-.~;;~: ~------~;~-~ - Abandoned Vehicles 97 693 14.0% General Codes 70 1456 4.8% Landscape Related -0- 193 -0-% Nuisance Abatement 217 2630 8.3% Housing Code 19 230 8.3% Unsafe Code 6 34 17.6% Occupational License 6 166 3.6% Sign Code 4 88 4.5% Court Citation Warnings 4 36 11.1% Animal Control 1 31 3.2% Browning-Ferris 31 526 5.9% TOTAL CASES 455 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 7.5% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Three AREA 4: SW Tenth Street to West Atlantic Avenue between South Swinton Avenue and 1-95 Abandoned Vehicles 204 693 29.4% General Codes 215 1456 14.8% Landscape Related 8 193 4.1% Nuisance Abatement 456 2630 17.3% Housing Code 99 230 43.0% Unsafe Code 9 34 26.5% Occupational License 22 166 13.3% Sign Code 3 88 3.4% Court Citation Warnings 1 36 2.9% Animal Control 7 31 22.6% Browning-Ferris 64 526 12.1% TOTAL CASES 1088 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 17.9% of the cases in the sample. AREA 5: Lake Ida Road to North Boundary between 1-95 and Military Trail Iii'"'"" '~ ................................ """ ......................... ~::: ............. Abandoned Vehicles 6 693 .9% General Codes 22 1456 1.5% Landscape Related -0- 193 -0-% Nuisance Abatement 28 2630 1.1% Housing Code 1 230 .4% Unsafe Code -0- 34 -0-% Occupational License 2 166 1.2% Sign Code -0- 88 -0-% Court Citation Warnings -0- 36 -0-% Animal Control 3 31 9.7% Browning-Ferris 12 526 2.3% TOTAL CASES 74 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 1.2% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Four AREA 6: West Atlantic Avenue to Lake Ida Road between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Boundary Abandoned Vehicles 47 693 6.8% General Codes 150 1456 10.3% Landscape Related 10 193 5.2% Nuisance Abatement 213 2630 8.1% Housing Code 27 230 11.7% Unsafe Code 2 34 5.9% Occupational License 16 166 9.6% Sign Code 10 88 11.4% Court Citation Warnings -0- 36 -0-% Animal Control -0- 31 -0-% Browning-Ferris 43 526 8.2% TOTAL CASES 518 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 8.5% of the cases in the sample. AREA 7: East of Intracoastal ':'::::::::~'~:¥:'">'::">':~' ' :: '":::<~:>':::::::'>:'<>'::::'~'~>;':':::':':':':<' Abandoned Vehicles 4 693 .6% General Codes 81 1456 5.6% Landscape Related 8 193 4.1% Nuisance Abatement 78 2630 3.0% Housing Code 2 230 .9% Unsafe Code 1 34 2.9% Occupational License 4 166 2.4% Sign Code 9 88 10.2% Court Citation Warnings 2 36 5.6% Animal Control 3 31 9.7% Browning-Ferris 39 526 7.4% TOTAL CASES 231 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 3.8% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Five AREA 8: Linton Boulevard to West Atlantic Avenue between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Boundary Abandoned Vehicles 29 693 4.2% General Codes 99 1456 6.8% Landscape Related 10 193 5.2% Nuisance Abatement 143 2630 5.4% Housing Code 12 230 5.2% Unsafe Code 3 34 8.8% Occupational License 18 166 10.9% Sign Code 7 88 8.0% Court Citation Warnings 4 36 11.1% Animal Control 2 31 6.5% Browning-Ferris 45 526 8.6% TOTAL CASES 372 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 6.1% of the cases in the sample. AREA 9: South Boundary to Linton Boulevard between 1-95 and Military Trail/West Abandoned Vehicles 2 693 .3% General Codes 40 1456 2.7% Landscape Related 9 193 4.7% Nuisance Abatement 11 2630 .4% Housing Code 3 230 1.3% Unsafe Code -0- 34 -0-% Occupational License 6 166 3.6% Sign Code 5 88 5.7% Court Citation Warnings -0- 36 -0-% Animal Control I 31 3.2% Browning-Ferris 29 526 5.5% TOTAL CASES 106 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 1.7% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Six AREA 10: Linton Boulevard to SW Tenth Street between South Swinton/Old Dixie and 1-95 Abandoned Vehicles 32 693 4.6% General Codes 51 1456 3.5% Landscape Related 6 193 3.1% Nuisance Abatement 180 2630 6.8% Housing Code 16 230 7.0% Unsafe Code 4 34 11.8% Occupational License 6 166 3.6% Sign Code 3 88 3.4% Cou~ Citation Warnings -0- 36 -0-% Animal Control 5 31 16.1% Browning-Ferris 20 526 3.8% TOTAL CASES 323 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 5.3% of the cases in the sample. AREA 11: Old Dixie Highway to 1-95 between South Bounda~ and Linton Boulevard ~~"~~{~;~~~ ...... ~ ............................... ~T-.~.~T--~ - Abandoned Vehicles 11 693 1.6% General Codes 83 1456 5.7% Landscape Related 4 193 2.1% Nuisance Abatement 32 2630 1.2% Housing Code 5 230 2.2% Unsafe Code -0- 34 -0-% Occupational License 10 166 6.0% Sign Code 1 88 1.1% Cou~ Citation Warnings 2 36 5.6% Animal Control 4 31 12.9% Browning-Ferris 20 526 3.8% TOTAL CASES 172 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 2.8% of the cases in the sample. David Harden November 9, 1998 Page Seven AREA 12: South Boundary to East Atlantic between Intracoastal and Old Dixie North Swinton Avenue Abandoned Vehicles 97 693 14.0% General Codes 208 1456 14.3% Landscape Related 63 193 32.6% Nuisance Abatement 337 2630 12.8% Housing Code 15 230 6.5% Unsafe Code 5 34 14.7% Occupational License 35 , 166 21.1% Sign Code 27 88 30.7% Court Citation Warnings -0- 36 -0-% Animal Control 1 31 3.2% Browning-Ferris 55 526 10.5% TOTAL CASES 843 6083 Overall, this area accounted for 13.9% of the cases in the sample. RB:mh The following is a verbatim transcript of the discussion which occurred at the City Commission workshop meeting held on November 12, 1996, with respect to agenda item (2) Concerns raised by Dr. Josh Smith, Jr.: DR. SMITH: "Good evening, my name is Josh Smith, Jr., and as I briefly explained last week, I was approached by a significant percentage of our Black constituents here in the city and we have two members of that committee, I guess, who comprise sort of the steering portion of the group, Ms. Charlotte Wright and, of course, Mr. Willie Ports, Jr., who is also present with me here. They asked me if I would articulate their concerns to the Commission with as much clarity as possible to insure that there was no misunderstanding with regard to what their concerns and fears were and why, you know, there were concerns and fears. "I think that with regard to the five factors that I mention in the packet that I left with each one of the Commissioners last week, the two basic issues of concern and fears center around I guess maybe equity and parity, or a lack thereof. Minorities in Delray Beach are simply seeking better ethnic equity, more people being involved, you know, in decision making that they are also affected by. And I might point out now that there was one point at which maybe Blacks might have had a minority on being economically disadvantaged, but now it kind of cuts across the grain. You also have a significant percentage of non-Blacks who are impacted by the havoc the economy is wreaking upon various citizens within our municipality. Therefore, I think that our concerns are also for the economically disadvantaged individuals who might not necessarily be Black, but those who may perceive themselves as being disadvantaged without a voice and disenfranchised. "With regard to the five factors that I briefly mentioned last week, I went into brief detail on it and with the permission of the Commissioners will touch on each one as perceived by the group I'm here on behalf of. If you take a ride around the city and you look at the piles of rubbish that citizens pile up on the outside of sidewalks, the cleaner sidewalks are the paved streets, basically on the city's easement. They place that rubbish there with the expectation that the waste management people will pick it up, and included within that debris is sometimes grass cuttings, glass containers (some of them broken), broken chairs, old mattresses, etc., and this perhaps occurs on a more frequent basis in the southwest and the northwest sections of the City. This may not necessarily be the optimum method of doing it as far as society is concerned, but these people pay garbage fees also and they have a reasonable expectation to have these various types of debris picked up. And this rubbish which is extremely dangerous to playing children is sometimes allowed to remain there for weeks at a time, based upon my understanding. I don't know whether that was a habit of the former or the ex waste management company and whether, in fact, it is a continuation with the new company that the City has performing that task now. "With regard to item #2, there is a perception of bullying and roughhouse tactics being used with young Blacks who may not necessarily conform to what we consider societal norms as far as behavorial characteristics are concerned. And no matter how undesirable or unacceptable the behavior is perceived by law enforcement officials, as long as a personal threat is not apparent, there is nothing wrong with humane dialogue and treatment being afforded to young Blacks within the City. I cited last week the recent racial strife that occurred in St. Petersburg, and the group doesn't feel that that was purely coincidental. Dormant rage, which probably had been dormant over a period of time, just simply erupted to the surface. And that city is now asking for a study of the racial problems and suggestions for ways to make race relations better. They are in a reactive mode, and we are in a position to take a proactive approach to whatever the problems may be. Law enforcement officials are not going to change the culture of these young people. Their culture is different from the average young white person and in all probability nothing is going to change that. Familiarity with and knowledge of different cultures and sensitivity training would, I believe, eliminate alot of the hostile feelings presently existing between young blacks and law enforcement officials. And I hasten to add that this is not an indictment of the entire Police force. I feel most of the City officers' behavior, by and large, may be very professional, but it only takes a minimal percentage to create problems of a phenomenal magnitude. "About three weeks ago I was apprised that an alleged criminal was thought by the Delray Beach Police Department to have been housed within a home somewhere in the southwest section. A multiplicity of black families were roused from their homes and it is my understanding that they were supposedly kept from returning to their homes for about 4 or 5 hours. The media reported that 25 Delray Beach Police officers were on the scene and I thought that that really kind of smacked of gross overkill. Ultimately, what was supposedly a thorough search of the suspected home, it was found that the criminal thought to have been there was not there. And I can't even remotely imagine citizens in a predominantly white area being inconvenienced in a similar type manner as the black citizens in that area were inconvenienced by being forced to leave their homes for a period of 4 to 5 hours when ultimately the criminal who was thought to have been there was not there. "With regard to item #3, young blacks do have a need for social outlets. They have a desire also to have clean, wholesome fun the same way that young whites do. The difference in the manner that each group chooses to do so, I think, is more economically oriented than any other reason. The vast majority of young people of color are economically disadvantaged to varying degrees. And part of their culture always has simply been to gather with individuals that they have more in common - 2 - with, somewhere within the confines of their own community. Of course there are some young blacks who have succeeded with mainstream socialization, but I think we all know that they constitute a vast minority. And regardless of the ethnicity, the religion, the nationality, etc., there will always be a small percentage that will create problems for everyone. Therefore, we do not feel that the black youth has a monopoly on these circumstances. Instead we feel our philosophy should not necessarily be "if one rat in the pack is bad, shoot the entire pack". Deal decisively with the small percentage of troublemakers, but the vast majority of young blacks are not troublemakers. They simply want to have clean, wholesome fun. "I also touched on the fact that there are only two tennis courts at Pompey Park, and masses of individuals have to sit around for two or three hours waiting to play, if in fact they get a chance to play at all. Now we know the argument is, "We don't want to create two separate societies nor tennis centers". But I would hope that the Com~lssion would consider economic factors that make it impossible for many young blacks to pay to play at the Delray Beach Tennis Center. They do not have to pay to play at Pompey Park. If there was some way that the cost could be subsidized for our economically disadvantaged young blacks at the tennis center, they probably would take advantage of their opportunity to play there. But there is a distinct difference; they have to pay to play at the tennis center. I've been a member of the tennis center for the last fifteen or twenty years, but the vast majority of the young blacks within the city are not able to afford the fees that are necessary in order for them to play at the Delray Beach tennis center, and they do not have to pay fees at Pompey Park. So I think possibly if we would consider additional tennis courts at Pompey Park it would not necessarily reflect a separation of citizens within the city. I don't think that we would necessarily be creating two separate tennis courts or leaning toward encouraging two separate societies. In fact, that wouldn't even be necessary if there was some way to subsidize their playing at the tennis center. Presently there are no factors in place that would lead to that particular conclusion. "With regard to item #4, and I have additional packets of information that I've brought to leave with each City Commissioner tonight, because I have additional copies of correspondence by me to City officials dating as far back as 1989. So I was surprised when the group presented their factors of concern that one of them had been my major concern for the last 8 to 10 years. Alleyways that are paved are the ones that City crews service; the ones that are very seldom cited for code violations. The vast majority of the paved alleyways are in the southeast and northeast sections of the City which happen to be predominantly white. The vast majority, if not all, of the unpaved alleyways are located in the southwest and northwest sections of the City which happen to be predominantly black. - 3 - Since the citizens do not control which alleyways the City decides to pave as opposed to not paving, this seems inherently unfair to taxpaying citizens who live in the areas of the City where the City did not see fit to pave the alleyways. It appears that the citizens who can least afford the extra expenses of correcting code violations are the ones who are being saddled with this responsibility, while the ones who can most afford the extra expenses are the ones who do not have this responsibility. Somehow this just simply seems to be a gross inequity that does not afford all citizens equal protection under the law. With regard to item #5, this one is basically self-explanatory. There is a black perception that when it is black-on-black crime, there is no urgency on the part of the Delray Beach Police Department to promptly respond. Approximately three weeks ago I was the victim of vandalism on my property (I had eight windows that were broken), and I sat there for one and a half hours after calling and requesting an investigating officer. Maybe there were extenuating circumstances that I was unaware of. Additionally, there was an eye witness placing identified persons at the scene of the vandalism around midnight on the night that it occurred. Descriptions and names were given; this occurred on October 24th (1996); case #96-34787. Despite an eye witness, identification and names of two individuals, I didn't expect any meaningful follow-up and I did not get any. The one detective called me last week and simply wanted to know if I had additional information. I have to feel that if I had been a white citizen living in the southeast or the northeast section of the City and had been calling to report that my building had been vandalized by black suspects, the response would have been swift and decisive. "So I believe that of the five factors of concerns and fear, the one that I guess maybe does the most damage to people of color and economically disadvantaged people is the one that deals with the code enforcement because that hits the citizens where it hurts the most and that is in the pocketbook. And I just simply have to feel at this particular point that economically disadvantaged people, regardless of whether they are black or white, shouldn't be placed at a distinct disadvantage as seemingly has been the case in the southwest and the northwest sections of the City. So I thought it would be appropriate to call this to the attention of the Commission. There might be City staff members who might tend to want to refute this, but to my recollection I don't believe that any disparity studies or any inequity studies have been done. So if there is doubt on the part of any City official as to what I've related to you as fact, then of course that might be the appropriate course of action to take. But we know there are some problems and we are not in any way wanting to adversely impact the City's characterization of being an All-America City, but we do have a very strong desire that if, in fact, we are characterized as an All-America City that we be characterized as an All-America City for all of our citizens and not just select ones. - 4 -- "At this particular point, if in fact I may and you will probably not have a chance to go over this, but with regard to the code enforcement inequities, lack of parity, as I said previously, this hasn't just become my concern. It has been my concern since 1989. I think I've gone through three or four administrations, in fact, I think Mr. Barcinski was the Acting City Manager in 1989 at the time when I first expressed some concerns. So I have correspondence here, and I guess perhaps ... and I say this with all due respect to City staffers ... whenever you ask questions that may not have logical answers to them, whenever you ask questions that they are uncomfortable with, it seems that the modus operandi is to just simply not respond. I have sent various correspondence to various City officials with various inquiries, only not to receive any response whatsoever. And much of that correspondence is contained within the data that I have prepared for each one of the City Commissioners this evening. You probably won't have a chance to go through this, but I think that this will actually substantiate a significant percentage of what I have tried to relate to you. And that constitutes the jist of the concerns of the groups that asked me to articulate their concerns and fears." MAYOR ALPERIN: "Thank you. First of all, for clarification, you mentioned 'groups' What groups are these?" DR. SMITH: "It must be, I would approximate the total number as being about maybe 55 or 60 individuals, of whom Ms. Wright and Mr. Potts ... they have, I guess, given them the responsibility of kind of steering the dialogue and contacting me to articulate these concerns. As far as the group having a specific name, no." MAYOR A LPERIN: "OK, it is a group of citizens ..." DR. SMITH: "A significant percentage, a significant number of black individuals who have these concerns and also fears arising out of these concerns." MAYOR ALPERIN: "We just found out now that you never got a response ... we received a response to your questions. How does Commission want to handle this? Should we ask staff to respond or does anyone on the Commission want to make any comments or ask any questions first?" MR. RANDOLPH: "I suggest that if Mr. Smith does not have copies of some of the responses that I have seen, that first and foremost we make those available to him and then take it from that point." - 5 - MR. EGAN: "I agree. We've been getting these responses in .o. I got one as late as last night. Staff is certainly involved in it and responding, and Dr. Smith would need time to go through it to see what the responses say. At this point I feel it is still at the staff level. Let staff respond. We're not fully aware, but if the answers are not satisfactory then we need to get back together." MAYOR ALPERIN: "I have a very similar feeling. We don't want this to be confrontational at all. If we've got problems, we want to solve them." DR. SMITH: "That is our intent. We don't perceive ourselves as being adversaries." MAYOR ALPERIN: "I don't want anybody to feel that way. I don't think any of us up here believe that we should tolerate any kind of discrepancy in the treatment of any individuals in our City. I feel bad that you have not been privy to any of the responses. I hate to delay it any, but I can understand that it would be easier for everybody if they had a chance to look it over." DR. SMITH: "I might say this also in defense of staff. Ms. Lula Butler and Mr. Meeteer, one of the code enforcement officers, I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for each of these two individuals even though we were in adversarial positions because our positions differed. But there seemed to have been a degree of sensitivity that one could appreciate, and I recognize the fact that they have a job to do. They don't make policy, they only implement what the policy is and give some indication that they might to some degree empathize with the position we're taking and with the facts as we have raised them. But these two individuals, I have nothing except the utmost respect and admiration for them. I did receive maybe one or two responses from Ms. Butler, and I did receive one response from Mr. Richard Bauer. I guess there were four occasions where they contended that I didn't take care of the alleyway that runs behind my property. I hasten to say that the fact that the alleyways are unpaved does nothing to enhance the appreciation of the properties in these particular areas. I have my property fenced in and the alley is outside of my fenced property. There were four occasions where they got some vendors to go out and they say they did some $300 and some odd dollars worth of work and they billed me for it. Of course then I started asking questions and didn't receive any answers, and then it went up to $700 and some odd dollars, so it just keeps building and building, and this is something that I'm confronted with that my white counterparts, my counterparts that are not living in economically disadvantaged areas, don't have a concern, and it just seems unfair. Now, here again, maybe there are extenuating circumstances that we are not aware of, but all I've been asking for is some answers and I've gotten very few, if any." - 6 - MAYOR ALPERIN: "Are these (alleyways) being used for any City purposes?" CITY MANAGER: "Not that I'm aware of." MAYOR ALPERIN: "Then why don't we just abandon them and give them to the property owners?" CITY MANAGER: "That would certainly be my recommendation for alot of them, that they should be abandoned. Unfortunately, the way our LDRs are written right now, they require unanimous consent or unanimous request from all of the abutting lot owners to the abandonment. We are in the process of changing that since there is no legal reason for us to have to do that." MAYOR ALPERIN: "If we abandon it, then it is no longer the City's property, it's your property. You just move your fence and enclose it and it is part of your property." DR. SMITH: "See, I asked the same question in the past. In fact, when I first had this problem, and I have two pieces of property there, there wasn't an alleyway there. And since the alley has been there, it has created circumstances conducive to crime that we didn't necessarily have because people couldn't get back there. But now everybody can ride through the alley. I believe the response that was given to me before whenever I raised that question was that sometimes code enforcement officers or law enforcement officers go through those alleyways on their way to take care of whatever is of pressing concern to them, but I've never seen anyone in those alleyways except people passing through, you know, undesirables that you don't necessarily want in that close proximity to your property. But it was done since the property was purchased and there was nothing that I could do about it." MAYOR ALPERIN: "Obviously, some of your concerns were heard because there is some response happening already on that issue, so hopefully we'll find a way of resolving it." CITY MANAGER: "There is at least one alley, actually a T-shaped alley, where we have physically barricaded it off because of the crime problems they tend to create." MAYOR ALPERIN: "I think if we look at abandoning it and it becomes the property owner's, then it becomes a whole lot easier for the property owner to control access." CITY MANAGER: "One other bit of information I got today, which is displayed on the wall, is an atlas of alleys in the City. The ones that are paved are shown in green and the ones that are unpaved are in brown, but the area that is outlined in red is the area which is zoned some category of commercial or office. What this illustrates is that the paved areas are - 7 - overwhelmingly in the commercial portions of the City and the unpaved areas are in the residential area. There are some exceptions. Even along West Atlantic Avenue, I did not outline the commercial area there, but a number of the alleys in the commercial area have been paved. We've done at least two or three of them since I've been here that parallel West Atlantic. But most of these alleys really serve no useful purpose and they do create opportunities for criminal activity that there is really no reason for them to be there. Some of them we do have water or sewer lines in and we would need to retain an easement for those, although in many cases these are areas where these are old two, three and four inch lines that need to be replaced with larger lines out in the street anyway. But there are a great many of them that could be abandoned to everyone's benefit." MAYOR ALPERIN: "I don't think any of us take lightly your concerns, and we would like for you to have a chance to study the responses we got from staff to see if maybe something can be worked out with the staff to resolve those issues. Then, if there is still a problem, bring it back to us if a reasonable resolution can't be found. I'm surprised that there is a concern and I'm disappointed because we should be doing something about it. So we're giving direction right now to staff to see if the issues can be resolved." CITY MANAGER: "One other question I would have relating to the alleys ... you say the alleyways that are paved are the ones that City crews service. What did you mean by 'service'?" DR. SMITH: "My understanding is that these sweepers that you have, that City crews operate, they keep the alleyways clean. They are paved areas." CITY MANAGER: "I am certainly subject to correction, and I think at one time (perhaps in the late 1980s or early 1990s) the City did that, but my understanding at this time is that other than maintaining the asphalt, we do nothing else in these alleys. For a paved alley, the abutting property owner is responsible to keep the grass mowed and the trash picked up just like you would on an unpaved alley. It's just that part of it is paved so you don't have as much to mow." DR. SMITH: "I took the liberty to ride around the City in the northwest and southwest sections and the northeast and southeast sections. Staff can correct me if I'm wrong, but this is based upon what I've observed. I didn't observe any alleys in the northeast and the southeast sections of the City that were unpaved. And you said maintenance of the asphalt ... well, the asphalt goes up to the abutting property. There is no area there for weeds, foliage, etc. to grow as there is in those areas with unpaved alleys." - 8 - CITY MANAGER: "In most cases there is extra space beyond what you see paved. There are a few cases where it goes to the right-of-way line, but in most cases it doesn't. The platted alleyway is wider than the pavement." MR. ELLINGSWORTH: "Can we follow the Mayor's suggestion that staff meet with Dr. Smith to see which of your issues can be resolved?" CITY MANAGER: "That's what I'd like to do. Now that we've collected all of our responses together, I'd like to give Dr. Smith a copy of those. After he has had a chance to review them, let's talk about it. Maybe our assessment is not accurate; let's see if we can be sure we understand Dr. Smith's concerns and he understands what we think we are doing, at least, and work on it from that perspective. If we are not able to resolve some issues, we can certainly bring them back to the City Commission." DR. SMITH: "We appreciate ~ny assistance you can give us. We just have the desire to be team players and we want to feel we are a part of things." MAYOR ALPERIN: "We appreciate you bringing this to us in a proactive mode rather than confrontational, and looking for a resolution of the problems which will result in a mutually successful relationship." CITY MANAGER: "If I could I'd like to comment on two other points. With regard to the trash piles, that is something we all need to work on together. The contractor, whether it is Waste Management or BFI, is not required to pick up piles of yard trash that have paper and glass and other materials mixed in with it. They can refuse to pick those up. The reason for that is that the yard trash (grass clippings, hedge clippings, tree limbs and such) can be mulched and recycled. But if it is contaminated with paper and glass and such, then it cannot; it has to go to the land fill or the incinerator which is a more expensive method of disposal. It is the occupant's responsibility to properly separate their trash. Anything that is put in the green cart, the contractor is supposed to pick it up, but if you just pile mixed trash out by the road they are not required by contract to pick it up. We have an education problem and we are trying to educate people who put out mixed trash that this is not proper, and we are trying to work with our contractor. Right now they are picking it up, but under the terms of our contract they are not required to do so. And it is first of all the adjacent occupant's responsibility to separate that, and if there is glass or paper out there, to pick it up and put it in the cart so that it can be disposed of properly. The vegetative waste can be left at the curb." - 9 - DR. SMITH: "I'm not going to disagree with you, which is why I said earlier that the way it is done in the southwest and the northwest sections may not be the optimum or ideal way of doing it. Our primary concern is the possibility of young kids playing, being seriously injured by broken glass or whatever that has been there for three or four weeks. I might also point out, my property is on S.W. 13th ... it runs north/south. On the west side they put the sewage lines; on the east side they put the sidewalks, so the people on the side that the sewer line is on, they bring their yard trash and clippings over and place it on the other side of the street between the sidewalk and the paved road. So the citizens who own that property, such as myself, we have no control over that whatsoever. And going back to 1989, we were cited and fined for other people doing that until they discontinued the citing and fining." MAYOR ALPERIN: "It's a matter of education, and maybe we can work together to help get this resolved." CITY MANAGER: "The other thing I wanted to comment on briefly is item #2. Since 1992, we have been giving sensitivity training and training in cultural differences to everyone in the Police Department. Within the past year, they've had another 16 hours of training in that area. We are making aggressive efforts to be sure that our people have an understanding of cultural differences and the need to respect those differences and take them into account. That certainly doesn't mean that from time to time someone may conduct themselves inappropriately, and I would just urge that when that occurs that the person who has been treated wrongly or disrespectfully or whatever, needs to make a complaint so that we can deal with it and be sure that we maintain appropriate discipline in our Police force." MAYOR ALPERIN: "Again, that's education. Alot of people are afraid to do that because they don't know the system. Maybe we need to do a better job of updating people that they have rights and there is a way to get things done." DR. SMITH: "I don't want to belabor this, but a significant percentage of the economically disadvantaged people of color in the City, they are not sophisticated in articulating themselves and there is a reluctance on their part to even place themselves in the embarrassing position of trying to relate something to ... so they react in a manner which may not always be ideal as far as the societal laws are concerned, and this is another problem also. I alluded to the fact earlier that, by and large, we think the Police Department is doing a good job. But it only takes a few, and if in fact there are individuals ... and some of these individuals are young people of color, that even we, other people of color, have difficulty with ... if you need to deal with someone decisively, you do it. But by and large, we feel like the vast majority of the young black youth in Delray Beach are good people. They just want to have good, clean, wholesome fun." - 10 - MAYOR ALPERIN: "I don't think we think any differently. The City Manager will make sure you get a copy of the backup and responses for you to look over and hopefully we can resolve these concerns." DR. SMITH: "I appreciate that very much. We'll just sit tight and I'll wait to hear from you." CITY MANAGER: "We'll be in touch with you." END OF DISCUSSION. Prepared by: AMH - 11 -