Government Pirates

[NotCranky]

Aecetia,

No sense in getting excited about someone living in upper class El Cajon being a right winger.

You are right that somebody probably reported them. It could have been someone growing marijauna who didn’t want them around or it could have been the king of the hill who just built a huge McMansion and didn’t like the RV in their view. Either way the people got kicked off rural, private property when they were not hurting anybody and more importantly had found a reasonable, suitable and affordable way to live.

What was their offense not spending money? Not raising the tax base? Not following some nimby ideal for the local aesthetic?

I don’t see outright graft in my dealings. I See arbitrary or exaggerated impositions that become fees or costs to third parties or delay or other nusiances mostly manifested by a bullying or unresponsive and incompetent bureaucracy which is to a large degree as John said, “an interest group unto themselves”.

On the other hand I see, as you do lack of enforcement including sometimes egregious situations because the nature of the incident or offender makes it a burden on the county to follow through. So on the one hand if it is too much of a burden they turn an eye but if they can support someone important, grab a fee or penalty or create a job for someone and get away with it they are all over it.

[Aecetia]

The only person I have seen recently getting the County to take care of problems where people are dumping their effluent on the ground where they park their RV is someone like Turko. I really cannot understand anyone giving a self-contained vehicle on their own property grief. There are a lot more unsanitary conditions, including outright dumping all over the back country and removing dry brush from County owned property that should be addressed. I think the County needs to reprioritize what is important and what is not.

[Aecetia]

The only person I have seen recently getting the County to take care of problems where people are dumping their effluent on the ground where they park their RV is someone like Turko. I really cannot understand anyone giving a self-contained vehicle on their own property grief. There are a lot more unsanitary conditions, including outright dumping all over the back country and removing dry brush from County owned property that should be addressed. I think the County needs to reprioritize what is important and what is not.

[Aecetia]

The only person I have seen recently getting the County to take care of problems where people are dumping their effluent on the ground where they park their RV is someone like Turko. I really cannot understand anyone giving a self-contained vehicle on their own property grief. There are a lot more unsanitary conditions, including outright dumping all over the back country and removing dry brush from County owned property that should be addressed. I think the County needs to reprioritize what is important and what is not.

[Aecetia]

The only person I have seen recently getting the County to take care of problems where people are dumping their effluent on the ground where they park their RV is someone like Turko. I really cannot understand anyone giving a self-contained vehicle on their own property grief. There are a lot more unsanitary conditions, including outright dumping all over the back country and removing dry brush from County owned property that should be addressed. I think the County needs to reprioritize what is important and what is not.

[Aecetia]

The only person I have seen recently getting the County to take care of problems where people are dumping their effluent on the ground where they park their RV is someone like Turko. I really cannot understand anyone giving a self-contained vehicle on their own property grief. There are a lot more unsanitary conditions, including outright dumping all over the back country and removing dry brush from County owned property that should be addressed. I think the County needs to reprioritize what is important and what is not.

[Aecetia]

More on government pirates:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0300d.asp
“Government regulations are not mere expressions of codified benevolence. To regulate means to use or threaten force to subordinate private behavior to governmental commands. For instance, in New York City, building owners face a gauntlet of potential penalties. As author Jim Powell noted in the Wall Street Journal, owners face fines of up to $1,000 for illegally watering a lawn or flushing a sidewalk; up to $5,000 for failure to post a floor-numbering sign; up to $1,000 and a year in jail for recklessly or purposely failing to post a waste-collection sign; up to $1,000 for failure to post a sign about employee benefits; and up to $10,000 for failure to post a sign informing employees that the employer has no legal right to require them to take a lie-detector test. The hundreds of potential penalties turn government housing inspectors into petty czars, since almost every building will be in violation of at least one of the edicts.”

[Aecetia]

More on government pirates:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0300d.asp
“Government regulations are not mere expressions of codified benevolence. To regulate means to use or threaten force to subordinate private behavior to governmental commands. For instance, in New York City, building owners face a gauntlet of potential penalties. As author Jim Powell noted in the Wall Street Journal, owners face fines of up to $1,000 for illegally watering a lawn or flushing a sidewalk; up to $5,000 for failure to post a floor-numbering sign; up to $1,000 and a year in jail for recklessly or purposely failing to post a waste-collection sign; up to $1,000 for failure to post a sign about employee benefits; and up to $10,000 for failure to post a sign informing employees that the employer has no legal right to require them to take a lie-detector test. The hundreds of potential penalties turn government housing inspectors into petty czars, since almost every building will be in violation of at least one of the edicts.”

[Aecetia]

More on government pirates:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0300d.asp
“Government regulations are not mere expressions of codified benevolence. To regulate means to use or threaten force to subordinate private behavior to governmental commands. For instance, in New York City, building owners face a gauntlet of potential penalties. As author Jim Powell noted in the Wall Street Journal, owners face fines of up to $1,000 for illegally watering a lawn or flushing a sidewalk; up to $5,000 for failure to post a floor-numbering sign; up to $1,000 and a year in jail for recklessly or purposely failing to post a waste-collection sign; up to $1,000 for failure to post a sign about employee benefits; and up to $10,000 for failure to post a sign informing employees that the employer has no legal right to require them to take a lie-detector test. The hundreds of potential penalties turn government housing inspectors into petty czars, since almost every building will be in violation of at least one of the edicts.”

[Aecetia]

More on government pirates:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0300d.asp
“Government regulations are not mere expressions of codified benevolence. To regulate means to use or threaten force to subordinate private behavior to governmental commands. For instance, in New York City, building owners face a gauntlet of potential penalties. As author Jim Powell noted in the Wall Street Journal, owners face fines of up to $1,000 for illegally watering a lawn or flushing a sidewalk; up to $5,000 for failure to post a floor-numbering sign; up to $1,000 and a year in jail for recklessly or purposely failing to post a waste-collection sign; up to $1,000 for failure to post a sign about employee benefits; and up to $10,000 for failure to post a sign informing employees that the employer has no legal right to require them to take a lie-detector test. The hundreds of potential penalties turn government housing inspectors into petty czars, since almost every building will be in violation of at least one of the edicts.”

[Aecetia]

More on government pirates:
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0300d.asp
“Government regulations are not mere expressions of codified benevolence. To regulate means to use or threaten force to subordinate private behavior to governmental commands. For instance, in New York City, building owners face a gauntlet of potential penalties. As author Jim Powell noted in the Wall Street Journal, owners face fines of up to $1,000 for illegally watering a lawn or flushing a sidewalk; up to $5,000 for failure to post a floor-numbering sign; up to $1,000 and a year in jail for recklessly or purposely failing to post a waste-collection sign; up to $1,000 for failure to post a sign about employee benefits; and up to $10,000 for failure to post a sign informing employees that the employer has no legal right to require them to take a lie-detector test. The hundreds of potential penalties turn government housing inspectors into petty czars, since almost every building will be in violation of at least one of the edicts.”

[NotCranky]

County raises construction permit fees
By Craig Gustafson (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. January 8, 2009
Fee increase by the numbers
$3,308: Average county building permit fee for a home
$129: Increase for the fiscal year that ends June 30
$145: Additional increase on July 1
$3,582: Average fee after both increases
San Diego County boosted building permit fees yesterday, leaving developers indignant as they lay off employees and lose work due to economic stagnation.
The Board of Supervisors approved increases totaling about 8 percent over two years on a range of permits as they tried to keep pace with costs in the permitting office.
Builders – already opposed to the increases – became upset when they learned the increases would fund a proposed 3 percent salary increase for county employees.
“It’s unconscionable that someone is thinking of getting their salary increase when we as an industry are cutting people off of their livelihood and wages are going down and these guys are going up,” said Paul Barnes, president of Shea Homes San Diego. “It shows that staff and whoever would support such a motion are completely out of touch with what’s going on in this country.”
The fees average $3,300 now, and the increases would add $129 to that this fiscal year and $145 the next. Builders say any additional fees could be a hindrance to future projects.
Three supervisors – Greg Cox, Dianne Jacob and Pam Slater-Price – voted for the increase, which affects unincorporated areas. Bill Horn and Ron Roberts dissented, saying the timing wasn’t right.
Jacob said the county has made improvements in how it processes permits in the past two years and she supported the increase to avoid lengthy delays that had been commonplace.
Glenn Russell, program manager for the county’s Land Use and Environmental Group, said the fees are only intended to recover the costs of staff time in reviewing and approving the permits.
Russell noted that the permitting department has transferred 41 employees to other county offices, reducing its staff from 105 to 64. He said additional cuts and service reductions would occur without the fee increases.
The increases were based on the county’s two-year operational plan – a forecast of future expenses – approved last July. The plan assumed a 3 percent raise for employees resulting from upcoming contract negotiations with unions, Russell said. Supervisors pointedly noted the raises were not yet approved.
Borre Winckel, chief executive of the Building Industry Association of San Diego, called the decision stunning to the companies he represents, as many have been forced to lay off 70 percent of their employees.

——————————————————————————–
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; [email protected]
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; (Contact)

They already have been jacking up fees while business demand fades and the product they allegedly administer is crashing. Who else can do that?
In building and code enforcement, they are looking for every opportunity to greedily strip money or drive the volume in the various departments. This is when they are not sitting around faking work. Thank goodness there are limits to govt. ability to do this, but you better know what they are because the have no compunction against steering you and your wallet into a back alley. In fact they do their best to get you there.

This article just touched the tip of the iceberg. “Woe is he” who needs a permit or gets reported by a violation by some neighbor who thinks they are the “un-official homeowners association king”. The pilagers are on the rampage.

“We’re in a fight for our survival,” he said.
Despite yesterday’s vote, the supervisors have often been friendly to development interests. A year ago, they reduced a traffic impact fee for developers by as much as 40 percent. Horn and Roberts voted no, saying the reduction was not deep enough.

The discount doesn’t apply to small contractors or owner builders.Yeah, that figures. I don’t mind paying it if it pays for roads, but I’d be surprised if it were not going into a general fund and ends up paying salaries.Houses still may be falling, but it affects what we all pay for a house, contractor, or in taxes at some at some level.

These types of improprieties are a covert form of taxation without representation and welfare for county employees. They also have a million ways to drive the permit pulling consumer to employ countless useless third parties, depending on the project.

In most areas a simple “mom and pop” lot split is a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. San Diego used to be on par with other regions. I recently had bids for as high as 90k by a consultant and itemized a DIY venture at 40k at least.

ONLY INFLATION and a housing turn around can save a severe and merited backlash. Only these can sustain this system. See Rich’s article in top right corner.

[NotCranky]

County raises construction permit fees
By Craig Gustafson (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. January 8, 2009
Fee increase by the numbers
$3,308: Average county building permit fee for a home
$129: Increase for the fiscal year that ends June 30
$145: Additional increase on July 1
$3,582: Average fee after both increases
San Diego County boosted building permit fees yesterday, leaving developers indignant as they lay off employees and lose work due to economic stagnation.
The Board of Supervisors approved increases totaling about 8 percent over two years on a range of permits as they tried to keep pace with costs in the permitting office.
Builders – already opposed to the increases – became upset when they learned the increases would fund a proposed 3 percent salary increase for county employees.
“It’s unconscionable that someone is thinking of getting their salary increase when we as an industry are cutting people off of their livelihood and wages are going down and these guys are going up,” said Paul Barnes, president of Shea Homes San Diego. “It shows that staff and whoever would support such a motion are completely out of touch with what’s going on in this country.”
The fees average $3,300 now, and the increases would add $129 to that this fiscal year and $145 the next. Builders say any additional fees could be a hindrance to future projects.
Three supervisors – Greg Cox, Dianne Jacob and Pam Slater-Price – voted for the increase, which affects unincorporated areas. Bill Horn and Ron Roberts dissented, saying the timing wasn’t right.
Jacob said the county has made improvements in how it processes permits in the past two years and she supported the increase to avoid lengthy delays that had been commonplace.
Glenn Russell, program manager for the county’s Land Use and Environmental Group, said the fees are only intended to recover the costs of staff time in reviewing and approving the permits.
Russell noted that the permitting department has transferred 41 employees to other county offices, reducing its staff from 105 to 64. He said additional cuts and service reductions would occur without the fee increases.
The increases were based on the county’s two-year operational plan – a forecast of future expenses – approved last July. The plan assumed a 3 percent raise for employees resulting from upcoming contract negotiations with unions, Russell said. Supervisors pointedly noted the raises were not yet approved.
Borre Winckel, chief executive of the Building Industry Association of San Diego, called the decision stunning to the companies he represents, as many have been forced to lay off 70 percent of their employees.

——————————————————————————–
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; [email protected]
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; (Contact)

They already have been jacking up fees while business demand fades and the product they allegedly administer is crashing. Who else can do that?
In building and code enforcement, they are looking for every opportunity to greedily strip money or drive the volume in the various departments. This is when they are not sitting around faking work. Thank goodness there are limits to govt. ability to do this, but you better know what they are because the have no compunction against steering you and your wallet into a back alley. In fact they do their best to get you there.

This article just touched the tip of the iceberg. “Woe is he” who needs a permit or gets reported by a violation by some neighbor who thinks they are the “un-official homeowners association king”. The pilagers are on the rampage.

“We’re in a fight for our survival,” he said.
Despite yesterday’s vote, the supervisors have often been friendly to development interests. A year ago, they reduced a traffic impact fee for developers by as much as 40 percent. Horn and Roberts voted no, saying the reduction was not deep enough.

The discount doesn’t apply to small contractors or owner builders.Yeah, that figures. I don’t mind paying it if it pays for roads, but I’d be surprised if it were not going into a general fund and ends up paying salaries.Houses still may be falling, but it affects what we all pay for a house, contractor, or in taxes at some at some level.

These types of improprieties are a covert form of taxation without representation and welfare for county employees. They also have a million ways to drive the permit pulling consumer to employ countless useless third parties, depending on the project.

In most areas a simple “mom and pop” lot split is a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. San Diego used to be on par with other regions. I recently had bids for as high as 90k by a consultant and itemized a DIY venture at 40k at least.

ONLY INFLATION and a housing turn around can save a severe and merited backlash. Only these can sustain this system. See Rich’s article in top right corner.

[NotCranky]

County raises construction permit fees
By Craig Gustafson (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. January 8, 2009
Fee increase by the numbers
$3,308: Average county building permit fee for a home
$129: Increase for the fiscal year that ends June 30
$145: Additional increase on July 1
$3,582: Average fee after both increases
San Diego County boosted building permit fees yesterday, leaving developers indignant as they lay off employees and lose work due to economic stagnation.
The Board of Supervisors approved increases totaling about 8 percent over two years on a range of permits as they tried to keep pace with costs in the permitting office.
Builders – already opposed to the increases – became upset when they learned the increases would fund a proposed 3 percent salary increase for county employees.
“It’s unconscionable that someone is thinking of getting their salary increase when we as an industry are cutting people off of their livelihood and wages are going down and these guys are going up,” said Paul Barnes, president of Shea Homes San Diego. “It shows that staff and whoever would support such a motion are completely out of touch with what’s going on in this country.”
The fees average $3,300 now, and the increases would add $129 to that this fiscal year and $145 the next. Builders say any additional fees could be a hindrance to future projects.
Three supervisors – Greg Cox, Dianne Jacob and Pam Slater-Price – voted for the increase, which affects unincorporated areas. Bill Horn and Ron Roberts dissented, saying the timing wasn’t right.
Jacob said the county has made improvements in how it processes permits in the past two years and she supported the increase to avoid lengthy delays that had been commonplace.
Glenn Russell, program manager for the county’s Land Use and Environmental Group, said the fees are only intended to recover the costs of staff time in reviewing and approving the permits.
Russell noted that the permitting department has transferred 41 employees to other county offices, reducing its staff from 105 to 64. He said additional cuts and service reductions would occur without the fee increases.
The increases were based on the county’s two-year operational plan – a forecast of future expenses – approved last July. The plan assumed a 3 percent raise for employees resulting from upcoming contract negotiations with unions, Russell said. Supervisors pointedly noted the raises were not yet approved.
Borre Winckel, chief executive of the Building Industry Association of San Diego, called the decision stunning to the companies he represents, as many have been forced to lay off 70 percent of their employees.

——————————————————————————–
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; [email protected]
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; (Contact)

They already have been jacking up fees while business demand fades and the product they allegedly administer is crashing. Who else can do that?
In building and code enforcement, they are looking for every opportunity to greedily strip money or drive the volume in the various departments. This is when they are not sitting around faking work. Thank goodness there are limits to govt. ability to do this, but you better know what they are because the have no compunction against steering you and your wallet into a back alley. In fact they do their best to get you there.

This article just touched the tip of the iceberg. “Woe is he” who needs a permit or gets reported by a violation by some neighbor who thinks they are the “un-official homeowners association king”. The pilagers are on the rampage.

“We’re in a fight for our survival,” he said.
Despite yesterday’s vote, the supervisors have often been friendly to development interests. A year ago, they reduced a traffic impact fee for developers by as much as 40 percent. Horn and Roberts voted no, saying the reduction was not deep enough.

The discount doesn’t apply to small contractors or owner builders.Yeah, that figures. I don’t mind paying it if it pays for roads, but I’d be surprised if it were not going into a general fund and ends up paying salaries.Houses still may be falling, but it affects what we all pay for a house, contractor, or in taxes at some at some level.

These types of improprieties are a covert form of taxation without representation and welfare for county employees. They also have a million ways to drive the permit pulling consumer to employ countless useless third parties, depending on the project.

In most areas a simple “mom and pop” lot split is a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. San Diego used to be on par with other regions. I recently had bids for as high as 90k by a consultant and itemized a DIY venture at 40k at least.

ONLY INFLATION and a housing turn around can save a severe and merited backlash. Only these can sustain this system. See Rich’s article in top right corner.

[NotCranky]

County raises construction permit fees
By Craig Gustafson (Contact) Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. January 8, 2009
Fee increase by the numbers
$3,308: Average county building permit fee for a home
$129: Increase for the fiscal year that ends June 30
$145: Additional increase on July 1
$3,582: Average fee after both increases
San Diego County boosted building permit fees yesterday, leaving developers indignant as they lay off employees and lose work due to economic stagnation.
The Board of Supervisors approved increases totaling about 8 percent over two years on a range of permits as they tried to keep pace with costs in the permitting office.
Builders – already opposed to the increases – became upset when they learned the increases would fund a proposed 3 percent salary increase for county employees.
“It’s unconscionable that someone is thinking of getting their salary increase when we as an industry are cutting people off of their livelihood and wages are going down and these guys are going up,” said Paul Barnes, president of Shea Homes San Diego. “It shows that staff and whoever would support such a motion are completely out of touch with what’s going on in this country.”
The fees average $3,300 now, and the increases would add $129 to that this fiscal year and $145 the next. Builders say any additional fees could be a hindrance to future projects.
Three supervisors – Greg Cox, Dianne Jacob and Pam Slater-Price – voted for the increase, which affects unincorporated areas. Bill Horn and Ron Roberts dissented, saying the timing wasn’t right.
Jacob said the county has made improvements in how it processes permits in the past two years and she supported the increase to avoid lengthy delays that had been commonplace.
Glenn Russell, program manager for the county’s Land Use and Environmental Group, said the fees are only intended to recover the costs of staff time in reviewing and approving the permits.
Russell noted that the permitting department has transferred 41 employees to other county offices, reducing its staff from 105 to 64. He said additional cuts and service reductions would occur without the fee increases.
The increases were based on the county’s two-year operational plan – a forecast of future expenses – approved last July. The plan assumed a 3 percent raise for employees resulting from upcoming contract negotiations with unions, Russell said. Supervisors pointedly noted the raises were not yet approved.
Borre Winckel, chief executive of the Building Industry Association of San Diego, called the decision stunning to the companies he represents, as many have been forced to lay off 70 percent of their employees.

——————————————————————————–
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; [email protected]
Craig Gustafson: (619) 293-1399; (Contact)

They already have been jacking up fees while business demand fades and the product they allegedly administer is crashing. Who else can do that?
In building and code enforcement, they are looking for every opportunity to greedily strip money or drive the volume in the various departments. This is when they are not sitting around faking work. Thank goodness there are limits to govt. ability to do this, but you better know what they are because the have no compunction against steering you and your wallet into a back alley. In fact they do their best to get you there.

This article just touched the tip of the iceberg. “Woe is he” who needs a permit or gets reported by a violation by some neighbor who thinks they are the “un-official homeowners association king”. The pilagers are on the rampage.

“We’re in a fight for our survival,” he said.
Despite yesterday’s vote, the supervisors have often been friendly to development interests. A year ago, they reduced a traffic impact fee for developers by as much as 40 percent. Horn and Roberts voted no, saying the reduction was not deep enough.

The discount doesn’t apply to small contractors or owner builders.Yeah, that figures. I don’t mind paying it if it pays for roads, but I’d be surprised if it were not going into a general fund and ends up paying salaries.Houses still may be falling, but it affects what we all pay for a house, contractor, or in taxes at some at some level.

These types of improprieties are a covert form of taxation without representation and welfare for county employees. They also have a million ways to drive the permit pulling consumer to employ countless useless third parties, depending on the project.

In most areas a simple “mom and pop” lot split is a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. San Diego used to be on par with other regions. I recently had bids for as high as 90k by a consultant and itemized a DIY venture at 40k at least.

ONLY INFLATION and a housing turn around can save a severe and merited backlash. Only these can sustain this system. See Rich’s article in top right corner.

[Author]

Posts