Code Enforcement Officer – Barney Fife

Hey Andy – ya gotta promise you’ll keep this confidential – just between you and me, OK?

I got my hands on a copy of the proposed Planning & Zoning Board Ordinance.

Andy, you know what a dedicated peace officer I am and how busy I am protecting the folks around here, but I was thinking I could work part time as Weatherford’s Code Enforcement Officer. Heck after reading the proposed P & Z Ordinance, sounds like they had me in mind when they wrote it!

I’m just the man to clean up this town.  Once they pass the P & Z Ordinance, me and my trusty side-arm can go to work! If I see something that I don’t like, I can go on anybody’s property and start my investigation. Heck, I won’t even need a search warrant or any of that technical stuff to slow me down.

Do you think Goober would agree to be my “designated representative” in case I am busy with one of my j-walking investigations or something?  You know how well we work as a fine tuned investigative team.

Here’s a copy of the enforcement part of the Ordinance – ya gotta agree I’d be perfect for the job – right Andy?

(h) Administration and enforcement:

(1) A designated City of Weatherford official, such as the Director of Planning and Development, shall be authorized by the City Council to administer and enforce the provisions of this Ordinance. If such designated official finds upon his/her own personal observation, or upon receipt of a complaint, that the provisions of this Ordinance are being violated, he/she shall immediately investigate and, when necessary, give written notice to the person(s) responsible to cease or correct such violation(s) immediately. Notice may be delivered in person or by certified mail to the violator(s) or to any person owning or leasing a property where the violation is occurring. The designated city official, or his/her authorized representative, shall have the right to enter upon any premises at any reasonable time for the purpose of making inspections of buildings or premises that may be necessary to carry out the duties in the enforcement of this Ordinance.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is not intended as a criticism of individuals –

Our intent is to draw attention to the ambiguity and vagueness of the enforcement arm of the proposed P & Z Ordinance.

8 responses

  1. Interesting. Are we trying to be like Washington and take away freedom or are we truly interested in protecting the rights of people?

    The vagueness in this revision of the P & Z Ordinance needs to be addressed and it needs to be re-worded.

    I believe Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are guaranteed under the Constitution. To encroach upon these would be Un-Constitutional and unlawful.

    Hopefully this will be revised before it make it to the City Council for approval.

  2. Of course, if Barney had actually showed up at the public hearing, he would know this clause was discussed extensively, and was sent back to be revised. It does not trump the Fourth Amendment, and any incursion onto private property for purposes of Title XII requires a warrant.

    Perhaps Barney should come to the (continued) public hearings?

    1. Brad – thank you for letting everyone know that the clause in question is being reviewed and revised.

      I think you can understand everyone’s frustration level these days considering everything that is going on in Washington. The intrusiveness of the Federal Government has gotten out of hand. Naturally, folks are concerned about their futures and unfortunately this blog is the only way they have of airing out their frustrations. Maybe the City Staffer who wrote the revisions should have done their homework instead of wasting the time of the Board so that this situation would not have been an issue.

      Also, I don’t know who Barney is but, maybe he is someone who has to work and provide for his family and cannot attend a 2:30 pm meeting. This is why I am so against having these meetings prior to 6:30 pm and not giving the people of Weatherford an opportunity to attend them.

      I was at a early afternoon Utility Board meeting a few weeks ago where they discussed changing their meetings to 6:30 pm. They decided to keep their meetings at the same time due to lack of attendance from the general public in the past when they did have a 6:30 pm time. In my opinion, all meetings should be held at 6:30 pm regardless of whether the public attends them or not. That would be exercising transparency in the way the City Government operates.

      This is not a shot at you Brad so don’t take it personnally.

      Another problem you may not be aware of is if you go on the City’s Website and lookup the P & Z Agendas and Minutes the last posting ot the minutes was on 06/25/08. If this was updated so the public could view them you might not get folks like Barney on here expressing their frustrations.

      Again, thank you for letting everyone know. We appreciate all you do.

      Sincerely,

      Eric Matthews

  3. Felmey, I don’t often repeat myself, but I think an exception is in order.

    Remember this comment?

    _____________________________________________

    Felmey, whoever said “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt” had to be thinking of you. You continue to make enemies you don’t even know.
    ______________________________________________
    I made that comment during a discussion concerning “The Three Amigos of Tax and Spend”. During that discussion, I was almost embarrassed for you. You made such a fool of yourself. Seems little has changed.

    Reasonable people will see this “Barney” piece as a lighthearted way to poke fun at city government, and at the same time, draw attention to an area of concern – an issue THAT WILL REMAIN AN ISSUE until that ordinance is approved by the council.

    Sometimes Felmey, tis better to remain silent.

    1. In life one is judged not only by friends but by enemies as well. It appears that I have attracted anonymous Internet bullies as enemies. I’m perfectly comfortable with that.

      Your cowardly and anonymous threats are meaningless to me. If you think otherwise, you’re kidding yourself. Enjoy your impotent anonymity.

  4. In response to :

    “Maybe the City Staffer who wrote the revisions should have done their homework instead of wasting the time of the Board so that this situation would not have been an issue.”

    The language in question is not part of the revisions presented by staff. The language is part of the current zoning code. In checking the origin, it was part of the revised zoning ordinance, adopted October 28, 2003.

    It is normal practice that, during the public hearing process, additional changes to existing language may be recommended or brought into question by the sitting Planning and Zoning Board. Such is the case here. Staff was asked about the language and requested to research and come back with some possible language amendment. The issue was whether the language could be removed, or whether it needed to remain (in some form) to allow for an administrative search warrant to be issued by the court, should such a necessity arise.

    As an update, legal has informed staff that the entire last sentence can be eliminated from the language of the ordinance, and the city would still have the right to enter with a legal warrant.

    So, as a follow up, staff will be bringing back the information, so that P&Z can revise the language for their final recommendation to City Council. Based on the information provided by city staff, the language

    “The designated city official, or his/her authorized representative, shall have the right to enter upon any premises at any reasonable time for the purpose of making inspections of buildings or premises that may be necessary to carry out the duties in the enforcement of this Ordinance.”

    can be stricken from the ordinance.

    Hope this helps to clarify the concerns.

    Regarding the current agendas, I went to the city website, just to make sure everything is up to date, and found the current agenda packet and minutes, including those from the last regular meeting, are uploaded for the public to view.

    They can be found at:

    http://tx-weatherford2.civicplus.com/Archive.aspx?AMID=65&Type=Recent

  5. Thank you Mr. Stephens for your thoughtful and reasoned explanation.

    Your response was a refreshing change from Mr. Felmey’s defensive gibberish.

  6. I thought the rules out here in this subdivision was that you could only build and live in 1 house so why is it that the people on West Yucca View I think the address is 232 , not positve but am sure of that they have at least 3 different familys on that property and have built a new house with people living in it and another family living in the old house and I think they have people living in a travel trailer on the property also.So if it is possible to have more then 1.house on my property then I will build me a couple more houses and rent them out to help me pay for my taxes and house and land payment. Thank Mark

%d bloggers like this: