Admin Order 53-00-03-F - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

jurisdictions. The civil penalty has proven an effective alternative to more expensive court proceedings. (b) The rule does not equate these factors. Gravity is, in fact, part of the multiplier rather than the base. The civil penalty addresses many issues, and may even be an incentive for correcting violations that are not safety-related. (c) This is somewhat correct in that section G assigns value based on threat to life, property or natural resources. Section N assigns value based on the violation's relationship to protection, preservation and development of natural resources. Although this isn't completely redundant, staff agreed that the inclusion of natural resources in both sections was imbalanced and it has been deleted from section G. (d) The intent of the comment was unclear to staff; no recommended change was proposed, and no response is therefore being made. (e) This comment was directed to a staff cover sheet that accompanied the proposed amendments. Although no response is required, for purposes of clarification, the maximum fine is $2,000 per violation per day. Comment 2: Nicholas D. Antone, III commented that: (a) The calculation sheet used by staff doesn't identify the code or administrative rules by number. (b) Alternatives to civil penalties are needed to address violations involving persons with medical and mental problems. (c) Increasing the civil penalties as proposed will contribute to greater homelessness. (d) A violation should be held as knowing, intentional and a repeat violation, not just one of the three. Finding: (a) This comment does not address the proposed rule. However, staff indicated the calculation sheet can be modified to cite the appropriate code and rule. (b) Civil penalties are only one of several tools used in encouraging compliance with City regulations; unless a violation is serious, intentional or repetitive, civil penalties generally come into play only after other efforts to achieve compliance have failed. Therefore, no viable alternative was proposed, and no change is being made as a result of this comment. (c) The increase in the penalty is to make the rule consistent with the code. As noted in the finding to comment 2(b), civil penalties are only imposed after other efforts to achieve compliance have failed. Therefore, no change is being made as a result of this comment. (d) These references in the rule are consistent with those in the code, and no change is being made as a result. Based upon the above findings, which are hereby adopted, and pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 2.018 and 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971, I hereby repeal Administrative Order No. 53-91-18 as of the effective date of this order, amend Regulations for Administrative Civil Penalty Rule R-2.018-C as proposed in Administrative Order No. 53-00-03 and amended as noted Administrative Rule R-2.018 - 2 c:\ WINDOWS\ TEMP\OOc20 18-2ao. wpd