NEXT MEETING: August 26th, 2009, 1-3 pm,
Oñate Center, Alcalde
Oñate Center, Alcalde
Somos vecinos, nosotros debemos tomar el cuidado del comunidad.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Task Force Meeting Notes
Rio Arriba County Comprehensive Plan
Task force Meeting Notes
Initial Nuisance Ordinance Meeting - Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 1-3 pm
Attendees:
Louise Pocock, RAC
Lucia Sanchez, RAC
Joy Gallion, Lindrith, Water Truck Operator
Ken LaGattuta, San Pedro, Retired LANL
Glenna Dean, Abiquiu, Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area
Gary Sauvinet, Abiquiu, Property Owner
Lynn Noel, Abiquiu, Property Owner
Lynn Cravens, El Guache, Realtor
Lorenzo Valerio, RAC Intern
Sign-in, Welcome, and Introductions
Staff Presentation: Background information on nuisance issues:
Louise explained that the County has statutory authority, through ordinance, to define what a nuisance is and control the proliferation of those nuisances within its jurisdiction..
Louise explained that most surrounding Counties, and most rural counties, have very little regulation around nuisance. In more urban areas, nuisance codes tend to focus on noise issues and the use of properties for illicit activities, rather than cars, trash, and vermin.
Louise and Lucia explained that in order to achieve consistency and real applicability within the ordinance, the focus should be on defining nuisances that are posing a clear health or safety risk to the surrounding area. Ultimately the goal of the ordinance is not to cite and prosecute, but to encourage compliance.
Group Discussion on Specific Nuisances
Glenna stated that many cultural artifacts, such as cars, building, barns, etc may appear to be a nuisance to some but are often very important physical remains of a specific culture and way of life. She suggested that the ordinance provide a means for community input on whether or not the structure is a nuisance or is a structure of historic or cultural significance, to ensure that communities have the right to protect what they consider to be important historical structures, and that there be incentives built in for people that would like to restore or preserve their historic properties.
There was extensive discussion on waste removal within the County and the responsibilities and authority of the North Central Solid Waste Authority. It was agreed that more information was needed and suggested that the County try and organize a presentation by the Authority at the next task force meeting.
There was discussion on using geography and location as standards for nuisance including looking at limiting the accumulation of cars, equipment etc., by lot size to better respect the settlement patterns of rural and urban areas. There was also discussion of establishing criteria based on proximity to waterways, public spaces, schools, etc.
There was discussion of the regulation of noxious and invasive weeds. There are existing County programs that address the proliferation of these plants and more investigation needs to be done into how those programs could be used or referenced within the ordinance.
The issue of soliciting adequate public input was raised and the general suggestion from the group was that there needs to be extensive public outreach, and that the ordinance effort should be coupled with an educational component to help inform property owners of what resources are available to them to rehabilitate housing, remove debris and inoperable vehicles, how to manage noxious weeds, etc. It was suggested that informational packets regarding these resources be developed for distribution across the County.
It was also mentioned that the Ordinance could possibly spawn economic development opportunities with the possibility of using the Youth Conservation Corp. to do low-cost housing re-habilitation, clean-up etc. Lucia mentioned that organization such as the Greater Espanola Valley Economic Development Corporation could help support these activities and the Louise mentioned that the GEVED could possibly help support a revolving loan fund for housing repair, environmental cleanup etc.
Discussion of enforcement options for proposed nuisance ordinance
Currently, the P and Z department’s code enforcement is complaint driven. Meaning, we only investigate possible code violations brought to our attention by the public or observed while out in the field. The nuisance ordinance will, for now at least, function in this same manner.
This raised the question of how to handle the situation of frivolous or unsubstantiated complaints. Louise stated she is not completely sure how that will be addressed, but she is hoping that having clear standards within the ordinance and the requiring evidence to substantiate a complaint will deter people form abusing the system.
The group agreed that there needs to be very clear procedures outlined in the ordinance that clarify the process for filing a complaint, and for resolving the complaint. There were differing opinions over whether or not complaints should be made anonymously or not.
Louise discussed the possibility of building in a sort of negotiation feature into the ordinance providing the opportunity for the complainant to communicate their desired remedy (so long as it is in accordance with the standards of the ordinance) and also providing for the person in violation to submit an abatement plan to the County outlining how they plan to come into compliance.
There was also discussion of a possible hardship exemption for people who can demonstrate that they do not have the financial means to comply with the ordinance.
Assignment of action items & Suggestions from task force members
Task force committee members were asked to continue to solicit informal opinions form community members on the issue of nuisance.
Louise will prepare an amend draft based on the suggestions and guidance offered in this meeting. The draft will be discussed at the next task force meeting.
The department will work on arranging a presentation by the North Central Solid Waste Authority.
It was reiterated by the group that the County web site should be updated and include meeting agendas, minutes, dates and locations of all meetings related to the Comprehensive Plan and the work of the Planning and Zoning Department in General.. Updating the website is a work in progress and Lynn Noel offered to help advise the County in redesigning the website.
Meeting was adjourned-homework for the Task force:
o Read and prepare comments on the next draft of the nuisance ordinance when available.
o Identify committee remembers from their region to be champions on the regional committees and identify additional committee members form other regions - we still need more representation from land grant members, acequia commissioners, school boards, and community members from the northern regions, Tierra Amarilla, Chama, Dulce, etc.
o Promote the Comprehensive Plan to fellow community members as a tool to guide policy in their region.
NEXT MEETING: August 26th, 2009, 1-3 pm,
Oñate Center, Alcalde
Task force Meeting Notes
Initial Nuisance Ordinance Meeting - Wednesday, July 22, 2009, 1-3 pm
Attendees:
Louise Pocock, RAC
Lucia Sanchez, RAC
Joy Gallion, Lindrith, Water Truck Operator
Ken LaGattuta, San Pedro, Retired LANL
Glenna Dean, Abiquiu, Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area
Gary Sauvinet, Abiquiu, Property Owner
Lynn Noel, Abiquiu, Property Owner
Lynn Cravens, El Guache, Realtor
Lorenzo Valerio, RAC Intern
Sign-in, Welcome, and Introductions
Staff Presentation: Background information on nuisance issues:
Louise explained that the County has statutory authority, through ordinance, to define what a nuisance is and control the proliferation of those nuisances within its jurisdiction..
Louise explained that most surrounding Counties, and most rural counties, have very little regulation around nuisance. In more urban areas, nuisance codes tend to focus on noise issues and the use of properties for illicit activities, rather than cars, trash, and vermin.
Louise and Lucia explained that in order to achieve consistency and real applicability within the ordinance, the focus should be on defining nuisances that are posing a clear health or safety risk to the surrounding area. Ultimately the goal of the ordinance is not to cite and prosecute, but to encourage compliance.
Group Discussion on Specific Nuisances
Glenna stated that many cultural artifacts, such as cars, building, barns, etc may appear to be a nuisance to some but are often very important physical remains of a specific culture and way of life. She suggested that the ordinance provide a means for community input on whether or not the structure is a nuisance or is a structure of historic or cultural significance, to ensure that communities have the right to protect what they consider to be important historical structures, and that there be incentives built in for people that would like to restore or preserve their historic properties.
There was extensive discussion on waste removal within the County and the responsibilities and authority of the North Central Solid Waste Authority. It was agreed that more information was needed and suggested that the County try and organize a presentation by the Authority at the next task force meeting.
There was discussion on using geography and location as standards for nuisance including looking at limiting the accumulation of cars, equipment etc., by lot size to better respect the settlement patterns of rural and urban areas. There was also discussion of establishing criteria based on proximity to waterways, public spaces, schools, etc.
There was discussion of the regulation of noxious and invasive weeds. There are existing County programs that address the proliferation of these plants and more investigation needs to be done into how those programs could be used or referenced within the ordinance.
The issue of soliciting adequate public input was raised and the general suggestion from the group was that there needs to be extensive public outreach, and that the ordinance effort should be coupled with an educational component to help inform property owners of what resources are available to them to rehabilitate housing, remove debris and inoperable vehicles, how to manage noxious weeds, etc. It was suggested that informational packets regarding these resources be developed for distribution across the County.
It was also mentioned that the Ordinance could possibly spawn economic development opportunities with the possibility of using the Youth Conservation Corp. to do low-cost housing re-habilitation, clean-up etc. Lucia mentioned that organization such as the Greater Espanola Valley Economic Development Corporation could help support these activities and the Louise mentioned that the GEVED could possibly help support a revolving loan fund for housing repair, environmental cleanup etc.
Discussion of enforcement options for proposed nuisance ordinance
Currently, the P and Z department’s code enforcement is complaint driven. Meaning, we only investigate possible code violations brought to our attention by the public or observed while out in the field. The nuisance ordinance will, for now at least, function in this same manner.
This raised the question of how to handle the situation of frivolous or unsubstantiated complaints. Louise stated she is not completely sure how that will be addressed, but she is hoping that having clear standards within the ordinance and the requiring evidence to substantiate a complaint will deter people form abusing the system.
The group agreed that there needs to be very clear procedures outlined in the ordinance that clarify the process for filing a complaint, and for resolving the complaint. There were differing opinions over whether or not complaints should be made anonymously or not.
Louise discussed the possibility of building in a sort of negotiation feature into the ordinance providing the opportunity for the complainant to communicate their desired remedy (so long as it is in accordance with the standards of the ordinance) and also providing for the person in violation to submit an abatement plan to the County outlining how they plan to come into compliance.
There was also discussion of a possible hardship exemption for people who can demonstrate that they do not have the financial means to comply with the ordinance.
Assignment of action items & Suggestions from task force members
Task force committee members were asked to continue to solicit informal opinions form community members on the issue of nuisance.
Louise will prepare an amend draft based on the suggestions and guidance offered in this meeting. The draft will be discussed at the next task force meeting.
The department will work on arranging a presentation by the North Central Solid Waste Authority.
It was reiterated by the group that the County web site should be updated and include meeting agendas, minutes, dates and locations of all meetings related to the Comprehensive Plan and the work of the Planning and Zoning Department in General.. Updating the website is a work in progress and Lynn Noel offered to help advise the County in redesigning the website.
Meeting was adjourned-homework for the Task force:
o Read and prepare comments on the next draft of the nuisance ordinance when available.
o Identify committee remembers from their region to be champions on the regional committees and identify additional committee members form other regions - we still need more representation from land grant members, acequia commissioners, school boards, and community members from the northern regions, Tierra Amarilla, Chama, Dulce, etc.
o Promote the Comprehensive Plan to fellow community members as a tool to guide policy in their region.
NEXT MEETING: August 26th, 2009, 1-3 pm,
Oñate Center, Alcalde
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
