Audit Oakland CEDA
Auditing. Informing. Empowered.
Custom Search
Web |
Alameda County Grand Jury Final Report Blasts Building Services
June 27, 2011
Today the Alameda County Civil Grand Jury released its final report on its 2010-2011 investigations.
Audit Oakland CEDA wishes to express sincere thanks to victims who came forward, who responded to AOC's mailing and testified, to employees who came forward, and especially the jurors themselves who took the time to listen and believe.
And thanks to John Russo for doing the right thing in the end.
From the report.
"In the complaints received by the current Grand Jury from property owners, the allegations included:
1. inconsistent standards for citing blight and nuisance/substandard violations;
2. lack of timely and understandable notice of violations;
3. lack of clarity about the abatement process;
4. difficulty in contacting and working with inspectors;
5. inconsistent evaluations by different inspectors working on the same case;
6. unprofessional, retaliatory and intimidating treatment by inspectors;
7. excessive and exorbitant fees, fines and liens;
8. unclear and ineffective appeals process that is sometimes ignored by Building Services personnel;
9. lack of a reasonable amount of time to comply and take corrective measures;
10. impropriety in the selection of abatement contractors, including allegations of ethical violations in awarding contracts and a lack of transparency; and
11. citizens feel discouraged from correcting blighted or substandard properties because it is too difficult and expensive to work with Building Services."
"RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 11-15:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must ensure that the true property owners are notified of violations through every stage of the abatement process.
Recommendation 11-16:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must provide the property owner a clear written description in simple-to-understand language on the notice of violation, and not just refer the property owner to a city code section.
Recommendation 11-17:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must implement a training program that emphasizes working with – not against – property owners.
Recommendation 11-18:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must eliminate the use of prospective liens.
Recommendation 11-19:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must revise fees and base them on actual reasonable costs incurred by the city.
Recommendation 11-20:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must establish deadlines for
inspectors to respond to property owners.
Recommendation 11-21:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must develop an operations manual to ensure inspectors operate in a consistent manner in applying code enforcement.
Recommendation 11-22:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must develop a centralized case management system that is easily accessible to all inspectors and property owners.
Recommendation 11-23:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must establish a clear, simple, effective appeals process that is easily understood by property owners and provides clear instructions for use.
Recommendation 11-24:
The city of Oakland Building Services Division must immediately establish an ombudsman function (not a Building Services manager or inspector) to review all appeals and to assist the property owner.
"In Schenectady, NY, a school maintenance man named Steve Raucci works his way up the ranks for 30 years, until finally he's in charge of the maintenance department. That's when he starts messing with his employees. Teasing them at meetings. Punishing them with crummy work assignments. Or worse things, like secretly slashing their tires in the middle of the night." This American Life
