By Cecily Burt
Oakland Tribune
Posted: 09/12/2011 03:38:59 PM PDT
Updated: 09/13/2011 05:46:54 AM PDT
Oakland's blight inspection program and contracting procedures will have stricter controls to correct several serious deficiencies reported by the 2010-11 Alameda County grand jury, according to the city's formal response.
Overzealous building code inspectors, excessive fees and fines, and a reliance on liens as a use of force will soon be a thing of the past, according to City Administrator Deanna Santana's formal response to the report. The report is expected to be presented Tuesday to the Community and Economic Development Committee, which is over the Building Services department.
The city plans to transform its code enforcement program from one that is complaint-driven to one that proactively targets real blight and preserves neighborhoods. To accomplish that goal, building inspectors now are refocusing their blight enforcement efforts on large substandard multifamily housing and foreclosed and blighted homes, said Margaretta Lin, deputy city administrator who helped craft the city's response.
Lenders will be presented with a list of blighted properties, along with fees and fines that multiply every day they are not paid, she said. Those fines and fees will have to be paid up front so they are not passed along as tax liens to buyers of foreclosed homes, Lin said.
Within 18 months, the city will implement a centralized case management system accessible to inspectors and property owners.
The department will also develop an
Advertisement
appeals process and a new operations manual to make sure inspectors apply code management in a consistent manner.
To help with that, the city has signed a contract with an outside consulting firm that will evaluate best practices in other cities, and recommend alternatives to using liens to put pressure on property owners to clean up blight.
"We are making changes to be more responsive to community needs and issues," Lin said. "We definitely plan to be more customer-friendly and transparent, and more accountable."
Dale Marshall, the grand jury forewoman, said she was pleased with the city's response regarding the new database and the change from a complaint-driven system to one that responds to priority blight and neglect. However, she said next year's panel would continue to "keep an eye on" the department.
"From my point of view, it's a failure of leadership," Marshall said.
"If a leader sets out clear policies and works well with staff, then each of these appalling behaviors could be corrected. ... These inspectors were left to their own devices."
As far as the appearance of favoritism in awarding contracts, another area cited by the grand jury, the city said in its formal response that it had already changed its internal controls to increase the number of inspectors required to review and approve low bid awards. Contractor payments also must be reviewed by two additional staff members, and change orders are limited to 31 percent of the original bid. Anything above that amount must be rebid.
Lin said that the new procedures have increased the number of new contractors in the bidding pool.
The grand jury reported that blight abatement contracts were awarded disproportionately to one contractor. That contractor, Arthur Young, was previously related by marriage to Building Services manager Antoinette Renwick. According to records provided by the city of Oakland, from January 2007 through June 30, 2011, Young's company was paid $2,211,472 for 752 jobs.
The two closest competitors, C & C Construction and De Silva Enterprises, won far fewer bids. With few exceptions, those jobs were not the most lucrative. C&C won 232 contracts worth $384,707, and De Silva won 250 contracts worth $372,412.
The grand jury also noted that Young had given Renwick a 10-year, interest-only personal loan that she failed to report for two years. Renwick resigned in October and is no longer with the city. Young said that he and Renwick's sister have been divorced for more than 20 years, and he was able to win bids because he works hard and knows what he's doing. He said he bid on jobs "just like everyone else" and was not aware of receiving any type of special treatment or favoritism.
He is also bitter that he was not allowed to tell his side of the story to the grand jury before its report was published.
"I've been in business 27, 28 years. I started out with a pickup truck and I built it up," he said. "Everybody is saying that people are giving me something, but that is not true. They are saying it's favoritism, but look at my track record."
Contact Cecily Burt at 510-208-6441. Follow her at Twitter.com/csburt.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18879263?nclick_check=1
No comments:
Post a Comment