Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-1974-055 Mr108.9 - Revised ,moo Notes-January - , ` 1974 1 I RESOLUTION NO. 55 A RESOLUTION REVIEWING THE PRACTICE AND CUSTOM OF CITY OF DANIA SINCE EARLY 1970 REGARDING THE DEMOLITION, OR REMOVAL, OF UNSOUND OR UNSAFE STRUCTURES; AND INDICATING GENERALLY THAT THE PURPOSE OF ALL MOTICNS AND INDICATED RESOLUTIONS ON THE SUBJECT WAS THAT OF MERELY APPROVING THE REPORT GIVEN TO THE CITY COMMISSION BY THE BUILD- ING INSPECTOR AS TO ANY PARTICULAR STRUCTURE AND GIVING HIM THE NECESSARY AUTHORITY TO REQUEST THE OWNER OF THE STRUCTURE TO COOPERATE WITH THE CITY BY VOLUNTARILY RE: OVING THE STRUCTURE, WITHOUT TI}E NECESSITY OF THE CITY GOING THROUGH TIIE PRO- CESS OF HAVING THE ,STRUCTUOE VEMOLISHED, OR RE- MOVED, IIY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE; AND RECOG- NIZING THAT THE FORMER CITY CLERK-AUDITOR EVIDENTLY ASSUMED THAT SUCH NOTI04S NraE INOUNDED O FOR- MAL RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING DEMOLITION By SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND AFTER FORMAL TITLE EXAMINATION, VERIFICATIOBi OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION, FORMAL NOTICE TO THE OWNER, ADVERTISE4EOT FOR BIDS FOR DEMOLITION AND RELA:'ED SP ,CIAL ASSRSSMENT PROCEDURES ; AND AUTHORIZING THE ADOPTION OF THIS FOE? l OF rJESO_UTION, 1 NUNC PRO Ti7idC, IN EACH INSTANCE, TO SHOW THE TRUE j INTENT AND UNDERSTAnOING OF TIIE CITY COMMISSION, NAi$ELY, THAT TUZ INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BY TIIE CITY FROM TINE TO TIOT WERE INTENDED TO BE IN THL NATURE way OF SInPLY GIVING APPI?OVAL TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND AUTHORIZING HIM TO CONTACT THE ONNER; AND FUR- TRER THE:AUTHORIZING ;; SO TII%'P I "" THIS I2"r:50LU^lIOiJ IN EACH INSTANCE PRI]SEN'T INTERNAL CONTROLS OF THE PRLSENT CITY CLEVE-AUDITOR CAN BE RELATED TO, OR CORRELATED WITH, ; HAT INTERNAL RECORDS TEE I CIL'-iFSR CITY CLc.RI:= . AUDITOR MAINTAINED; AND REPEALING ALL RESOLUTIONS, OR PARTS OF RESCLUTIOiQS, IN CONFLICT; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE NJNC PRO TUNC DATr WHEREAS, the general laws of. the State of Florida, the charter Of City of Dania and various ordinances of the city which have been adopted from tine to time all contain ample authority for the city to j control buildings_ or btti2 ding structures (chick may have became so di- i lapidated, Or in ouch a state^. Of decay, Or in CUCI c^ state Of ruin, Cr i in such a state Of disrepair, or have been ahandoned for such lolly 1 Periods of time as to be substantially destrOycd ,by vandalism or are In such similar atates Or conditions Accause Of other roasons so that i)ll kings Or building strucLwin2 are not citable for hlbitntion , Or CCinnOt be rebuilt Or r.crodole.l so as to comply with the minjoam rC:F1lli.1'C!^C'^t Of "Y appli.C,:b IC' houving Or hoilding C000s , or constatuja fire hL::l]':I$ Or C•OG.^,tAutc danyer:' to health and swn,tat,on; and . 1 l " :GSes Of this resolution/ ell buildings c„• II� J f l � I i building structures in the city which have any of the aforesaid charac- teristics are referred to herein generally as "unsafe and unsound struc- tures which should be considered for demolition by municipal authority" ; and WHEREAS, the basic laws of the city regarding the actual demo- liton of unsafe and sunsound structures provide that the administra- tive officers of the city should report the basic facts of each situa- tion to the city commis6ion and that, after notice and an opportunity to be heard being given to the record owner, the city commission then has the right to go through the procedures of advertising for bids from demolition or wrecking companies to demolish the structure in i j question, with the ultimate cost of the demolition to be certified and imposed or assessed against each parcel as a special assessment lien; and WHEREAS, beginning in about 1969 , City of Dania undertook a ,. major program to cause the demolition of many of the unsafe and un- sound structures which should be considered for demolition by munici- pal authority; and WHEREAS, for example, resolution no. 1951 of: the city commis- sion adopted on October 20 , 1969 , is an example of where many structures were actually demolished through proceeding with the extensive pro- cedures resulting in special assessment liens; and WHEREAS, after completion of the major demolition program in 1969 and early 3.970 , the building inspector would report to the city ? commission from time to time the facts regarding some individual or i j isolated structure uhi.ch was in a possible state so that it could not be repaired, rebuilt or remodeled so as to comply with the minimum re- quirements of the builcii.ng code; and WIMIUMS, it has been the experience of the city that practically every owner will cooperate and will assir�e immediate responsibility to demolish any unsafe or unsound structure , at his own expense and without the necessity of the special assessment procedure , if it is brought to ; his attcnt:ion that the city objects to the structure and desires its -2- i i demolition or removal; and WHEREAS, as such reports of individual situations were made to i the city commission by the building inspector after the completion of the major demolition program in about 1970 , it was the general inten- tion of the city commission to do nothing more than imply or state agreement with the findings of the building inspector (as to the un- safe or unsound condition of the structure) and to indicate that the building inspector had the right to contact the property owner to seek the demolition or removal of the structure which was the subject of E the building inspector' s report; and WHEREAS, the reports of the building inspector were generally informal in nature and would show only the approximate location or i est street address available of the property in question, without usually showing the exact legal description or the verified manes of ' the record owners of the property; and WHEREAS, in virtually every instance of reports of such type I '" where the city commission concurred with the findings of the building inspector and authorized him to contact the proper owners to cause I the unsafe or unsound structure to be demolished or removed, the city commission understands that the owner cooperated and voluntarily had the structure in question demolished or removed; and f WHEREAS , after the initial report from the building inspector, I the city commission generally received no further reports and, there- fore, believes that the situation as to each structure resolved itself I through the voluntary cooperation of the Omer and without further action on the part of the city commission being required; and 3 WHEREAS , the city attorney has indicated to the city commission j that he never understood that the infonial reports of the building inspector and the further approval of the city corunision , by moti.oa or oche n,•ise, actuall; roqu.ired or contemplated the formal preparation of: a detailed resolution (such as resolution no. 1951) which would re-- quire , among cther things, an exact legal description , a title report from an abstract company to show ownership of the property , a formal � -3- t � � 1 notice, a hearing date, an advertisment for bids (if the scope of the demolition was in such an amount to require competitive bidding) , the awarding of contracts for demolition and the final imposition of a lien i against the property through special assessment procedures ; and WHEREAS, the city commission concurs with the conclusions of the city attorney in the matter and agrees that it was not the intent of numerous motions made as to individual situations to require formal special assessment resolutions, but that it was only the general intent j i of such motions to indicate to the building inspector that the city com- mission agreed with the findings of the inspector and concurred that I he should contact- the owners of any properties in question to seek f i their voluntary cooperation regarding any demolition; and �JJ WHEREAS, unfortunately, the motions made by the city commission did not use a careful choice of words so, that such motions as "motion to condemn" , "motion for resolution of condemnation" , "motion that the property be torn down by special assessment" , and other like motions appear in the minutes of various meetings of the city commission; and WHEREAS, the present city clerk-auditor has reported that she I has examined some of the internal records , or memoranda, of the former. I j city clerk-auditor and that same indicate that the former city clerk- t auditor was of the opinion that a formal type of special assessment I resolution %.ras authorized and intended in each instance; and 7 i WHEIJAS, the understanding of the former city clerk-auditor was incorrect in that the city comriission did not authorize a forma].assessment resolu- tion which would eventually result in a special but in- tended to do nothing more than pass a simple motion giving the building inspector either approval, or guidance , in each matter he reported; and vnim As , the. city attorney his further indicated that his pri- vate notes , taken at each meeting of the city commission, show the true intent of the co!rmis., lon in each instance; and WHEREAS, because of the practice established by the former city i clerk-auditor was one which indicated that a formal type of special assess-- i meat resolution was authorized, the present city clerk-auditor has indicated _J I I that she continued to follow the practice during the first several months of her tenure in office (that is, from about March, 1973, to about January, 1974) by showing in her internal records that a resolu- tion was actually required; and i WHEREAS, in order that all records may be in conformity, the i city attorney has offered to prepare the within resolution which, in each instance, is intended to do nothing more than reflect the actual intention, or action, taken at each meeting of the city commission when the general reports of the building inspector were made and when he �i desired nothing more than the approval , or guidance, of the city commission; and WHEREAS, the city attorney has reviewed the question in great detail by a recent letter dated January 16 , 1974 (his file M-1084) ; and WHEREAS, in order that all records may be reconciled and still reflect the true intent of the city commission as to all earlier situa-- i tions where "motions to condemn" , or "resolutions to condemn" , or like • wti motions or resolutions were made, this resolution is being actually i drafted in 1974 to be effective, nuns pro tuns, as of the date that the jconclusion of the resolution indicates that same was passed and adopted, i NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE j CITY OF DANIA, FLORIDA: Section 1. That at a meeting of the city commission of the City of Dania, Florida, held on the 7th day of January__, 1974 the building inspector reported the following described property g situate, lying and being in Dania, Broward County, Florida, to wit, Houses at 1127A and 1127B Griffin Road x 1 1 to be an unsafe and unsound structure s which should be considered i -5- I r for demolition by municipal authority, namely, the City of Dania under the general laws of the state and all applicable city ordinances . I � Section 2. That the matter iaas stated on the agenda prepared I in advance of the foregoing meeting as follows: i I II "13. Request for resolution of con- demnation of two old and badly beat up houses at 1127A & B, Griffin Road. ' i Section 3 . That the minutes of the meeting recorded after the aforesaid meeting are quoted as follows : i i "13. On a motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Vice Mayor Duncanson, the a Commission authorized a resolution of condemnation for two houses at 1127A & B, I Griffin Road, the owners are M. Fridovich- Martin Investment Co. of Fort Lauderdale. " Section 4_ That notwithstanding the exact language of the minutes and regardless of the specific language which the minutes indicate that the city commission used to express their instructions, it was the intent of such language merely to indicate approval of the I report of the building inspector and to authorize the building inspector i to contact the owners of the property in question to attempt to obtain their cooperation in demo].ishing, or otherwise removing, the structure 1 (or structures) voluntarily. j 3 Section ;. That as of the time of the actual drafting, or j preparation of this ordinance (which is in 1974) , the building inspector is directed to report to the city manager if the building has not been demolished or removed. Further, if it beguile necessary to expend any municipal funds which have not been collected regarding any demolition, removal or notice, the building inspector steall report such expenditure to the city manaccr +-fo_ further ecct:ion , required. i —Sc-ct.irni 6 . That it is the purpose cuul intent of this rc solat.inn — to state more clearly the intent and undr.rst.ancl.inet c,f the city com,, t sion at the specific meeting where the matter was brought up for dis- cussion and to afford a means of having the present city clerk-auditor relate her practices to any earlier procedures followed by the previous city clerk-auditor, regarding internal control of resolutions . Section 7 . Even though this resolution is drafted in 1974 , its effect date shall relate back, nunc pro tunc, to the date that the matter was considered by the city commission, namely, the date appear- ing at the bottom hereof to indicate passage and adoption. i Section B . All resolutions , or parts of resolutions , in conflict herewith are repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 9. This resolution shall become effective as of the � date on which its passange and adoption is indicated (nunc pro tunc) . r PASSED and ADOPTED this 7th day of — January _ , 1974 i Mayor:-Cora^.�issioner Attest: City Clerk-Auditor t f a 9 I i t I 1 j I I 7 ! i i `VALDE\ AND Dunow n'u e�r:vs ,rr .ntr f,LARNE WALDEN D:\\L\, FLOItTDA 3300.1 RORERT E. OUSOW March 29, 1974 (Dictated March 27, 1974) Mrs. Wanda Mullikin City Clerk-Auditor City of Dania j Dania, Florida 33004 Re: Our file number M-1084 City of Dania - general opinion and suggested resolution regard- ing demolition of old buildings Binder notes of regular meeting of City Commission - January 7 , 1974 Dear Mrs. Mullikin: Reference is made to item 13. on the agenda for January 7, 1974, and to item 13. on the minutes for January 7, 1974, regarding the condemnation of two old houses at 1127A and 1127E Griffin Road. i It was at about this time that I reported to the city commission that in my opinion formal resolutions were not really intended. Nevertheless, I do not think that the commission discontinued the practice until some time later in January. Accordingly, I have pre- pared a form resolution regarding the action taken on January 7, 1974. I enclose the resolution, to which I have assigned the number, 55, and I request that you file same in your official resolution file. Yours very truly, I Clarke Walden i CW/dms Encls. h