From the Email InBox: Survey This

Dear Grandpa,

I have been in the survey business 20 years in a prior time, and you can use them to say anything you want, depending on who you are working for. Sounds like Doug Jacobsen’s stunt to try and get his projects through on Barton Road.

On the drive-by inspection fees, does this make the city liable if a tenant complains that his unit is unfit?


Gramps Adds:

Your right about surveys. You can make them say what ever you want.

About the Inspections opening the city to a liability. Well, not immediately. If a tenant asks Code enforcement to inspect the inside of an apartment for a violation, and allows the Inspector onto the property and the City Takes the Necessary action to Notify the Owner about the problems, and gets a fix done in a timely way I don't think the City will be open for Liability.

However, If the City Code Inspector fails to notify the owners of a tenant complaint that then results in a personal or property injury or damage, the City Might be a Contributing Agent to the Damage/Injury and may be open to liability. It would be an interesting case.

However, no one is FORCED to live in an apartment, and IF the City Inspector tags an apartment or house as Unsafe/Unlivable and pulls the Rental Use Permit, I would think the tenant would be able to break a lease and get their deposits back, unless of course they caused the problem that is being sighted.

I think that if there is an apparently abandoned vehicle or trailer that has been reported to the city code enforcement and no action is taken by the Code Enforcement Office, and it turns out that the vehicle is a drug lab, and it explodes,.... the city may be liable.... for its inaction. That would be an odd case. (I hope).

GRAMPS:

GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL

Survey of residents approved on 3-2 vote
The City Council voted 3-2 to approve a community satisfaction survey that will poll 300 registered voters in Grand Terrace.

Council members Jim Miller and Bea Cortes voted no.

Councilman Miller has excellent points on the proposed survey of 300 Grand Terrace residents. Mr. Schwab and the other Council members should take note of the comparison Mr. Schwab used of Moreno Valley. They have a 160,000 population, we are under 14,000.

Once again Mr. Schwab has a found a way to waste taxpayers money. Mr. Miller made the point, "what are they trying to find out". Here's the answer to that question.

NOTHING. Here's a fact. At every Council meeting there is a survey taken. It's called "Public Comment". The Council and city manager don't listen then, why would they listen to 300 people that will probably be chosen by the city staff.

For those that pay attention and remember when City Hall was packed with residents against the O.A.C., when City Hall was packed with residents against Lowe's, when City Hall was packed against "The Senior Housing", when City Hall was packed with residents against Eminent Domain for a private developers gain. Ask yourselves folks. How many Council members listened. Those meetings were real time surveys. They went ahead with the O.A.C without a market study or feasibility study. When the Grand Terrace Partners did they studies, and Mr. Schwab claimed he brought the project to the City and then admitted that it was actually Ralph Megna's goal to have "A big boy's toy store" here, it was neither marketable or feasible. That the projected revenue by Mr. Schwab, Mr. Knootz and Mr. Megna was just pulled out of thin air. You can't project revenue without those studies. We are all still waiting for an explanation as to why Mr. Knootz is a partner with Mr. Megna and also works for the City of Grand and every month there are voucher going to their business.

I think the members of the Council couldn't care less what anyone except their clique thinks. It seems every meeting one of the friends of the Council is getting some kind of award. I imagine soon they will start awarding them to each other. One last thought, Mr. Schwab comments about our surplus. I would gather from history that he has once again issued Tax Allocation Bonds for the RDA and his developer friends without telling us. That's how he camouflaged the surplus before. Remember the $13,000,000 "Portfolio" that was actually debt. Watch Out.

Gramps Adds: I am concerned that Asstant City Manager Steve Berry no doubt at the request of City ManagerTom Schwab released to Press Ent. the Proposed Survey as Fact Prior to being approved by Council. This Management from top down is a sign of arrogance that is tolerated by the GT City Council, and demonstrates the basic climate the citizens face when doing business in the City. I agree with the other points above, not that the council or City Staff care.

Dear Paww

The article stated that our Code Enforcement Office inspected 1100 apartments and 239 rental homes last year.. Say we take the working days a year, 261, not counting holidays off or any sick leave or vacation days. That meant she inspected 5 units a day or if she worked 7 days a week that would be 3.5 units a day. MMMMM I wonder how she got those all done. A Woman's Work Is Never Done.

Paw's Reply:
Remember that an "Inspection" is a drive by. If an apartment or rental looks good from the curb it passes inspection. So it is easy to drive by and see what does or does not offend the eye of that many locations. The report writing would take longer than the "Inspection". Of course some actual inside inspections may have taken place if the tenant complained or if the unit is new rental getting its occupancy permit for the first time. So now that the landlords have paid for the service to harass them, the code enforcement officer will have time and resources to intrude on all citizens. "Don't Tread on Me" this is mine comes to mind... Government Intrusion on Private Property Rights is not a new issue for me...