Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • littlebit: Makes sense.
    July 16, 2017, 04:40:28 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Boards will stay open for a place people can find history information longer. I am not allowing anyone to sign up for now because of so many foreginers just wanting to promote their business..
    December 10, 2016, 05:10:27 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Not sure why didn't look, I may be shutting down these message boards..
    November 17, 2016, 12:42:43 AM
  • ~kathy~: rick why is the timestamp showing up a day in advance?
    September 13, 2016, 12:27:46 AM
  • Valor7: What I tried to say is that the actual money would not be there that quick. But a loan against that would work if they are willing to do that.
    August 08, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Why so long before it comes online? 911 took out a loan or bond with the known guarantee payment and began building..
    August 08, 2016, 07:46:34 AM
  • Valor7: Actually no it is not, a dependable Revenue stream will not come on line until the 4th quarter of 2017 so 2018 budget will be up in the air, not quite sure what they will have. By 2019 budget all will be well.
    August 04, 2016, 09:27:17 PM
  • Valor7: You mean that tax that the Commissioners would not put on the ballot for so many years? Strange things happened when the citizens got a chance to vote on that issue.
    August 03, 2016, 06:43:06 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Back up is now available withe the new tax..
    August 03, 2016, 05:01:35 PM
  • Valor7: Thanks a lot Ladies!!
    July 29, 2016, 01:16:13 PM
  • littlebit: ((*(*&
    July 27, 2016, 03:47:52 PM
  • ~kathy~: lol
    July 15, 2016, 09:34:56 AM
  • Valor7: A guy could get killed around here while waiting for backup!
    July 13, 2016, 07:31:58 PM
  • Lepard LLC: You are not alone..
    July 13, 2016, 07:28:53 PM
  • Valor7: I just hate it when I talk to myself!!!!
    July 08, 2016, 12:54:09 PM
  • Valor7: I could have worded that better, we talked details, options, the pros and cons of each, in  order to arrive at the best ballot language to present to the voters. Hope that makes this clearer.
    April 15, 2016, 06:36:14 PM
  • Valor7: sorry about the typos still working with just one arm in action
    April 13, 2016, 01:10:42 PM
  • Valor7: Yes and no. We talked details and options until we were blue in the face but I never heardbring it over, it was always the time was not right for the issue to pass. Glad to see the time in now right and I for one shall vote yes on the ballot. I would urge all others to do the sameour county is busting at the seams crimewise and no matter how many bad guys we send off there always seems to someone to replace them. The Sheriff's Office needs the help.
    April 13, 2016, 01:08:35 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Is that true Valor? Did he ask you what you wanted?
    March 01, 2016, 04:55:37 AM
  • Lepard LLC: Gene Newkirk Rick I have waited for a Sheriff to bring it to me on what he wanted. I have pushed Mr long for a while to get it to me. He told me he was close to having or done. Now hopefully the people will get to decide on it. I spoke with Steve about this a few times.
    March 01, 2016, 04:54:54 AM
  • Kimberly: Wow- I have a new name..........
    February 23, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
  • Lepard LLC: Works on mine, improvements are being done here. I may kick back into her a lot and post but working on different technologies right now. Seeing how things interact.
    January 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
  • Valor7: Yes it is working. If you need a laugh the wife showed me how to correctly use the silly thing.
    January 04, 2016, 05:32:59 PM
  • Valor7: Think so, mine is trying to work but it is now user and password protected and I dont know mine
    December 17, 2015, 01:32:16 PM
  • "DJ": Is there still a working android app for the PCSD
    December 14, 2015, 08:14:53 PM

Author Topic: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants  (Read 20837 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sweetibear

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +6/-1
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« on: February 29, 2008, 01:25:50 AM »

Share/Bookmark

Fort Wood Hotel

Boards

Devils Elbow

Attractions

Sports

St. Robert

Waynesville

PC Daily

Dixon

Menu Guide

Fun Links

Homework

Crocker

Fort Wood

Swedeborg

Big Piney

Laquey

Classifieds

Restaurants

Richland

Fort  Hotels

I have heard that the City of Waynesville is trying to adopt a City Ordnance that there City Building Inspector along with the Waynesville Police Department Escorting them, If voted in they could apply for an Adminstrative Search Warrant for someones private property through there City Judge. Has anyone heard anything about this? WHY is the City of Waynesville getting into the business of issuing City Search Warrants? And ESPECIALLY with the Police Department escorting the Building Inspector going onto someones private property entrying someones house, apartment or whatever and if the Building Inspector is there for building code violation or violation's or because there is a large amount of trash in the yard or the building is causing an eye sore, why a POLICE presence? So if an officer sees something criminal in nature HOWEVER he/she is not there for criminal activity could it not lead to a criminal case because he/she was escorting the BUILDING INSPECTOR and it became plain view to the Officer. I am all for getting criminals HOWEVER in my opinion the means does not justy the ends what are the boundaries of the POLICE? What do you think about this?

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #1 on: February 29, 2008, 01:32:27 AM »
Not a lawyer, but a search warrant can only be issued with probable cause as far as I know.  I am not in the city so they can't come to my home, but you are asking on the wrong forum.  Ask a good lawyer about this.  It may only be rumor.

Offline I CAN C U

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #2 on: February 29, 2008, 02:54:40 AM »
I was watching TV and i stopped at channel 12 and the City of Waynesville City Counsel meeting was on, and YES they were talking about the City of Waynesville making a City Ordnance to adopt Administrative Search Warrants. They were saying that if the Building Inspector saw something that was in City Violation IE bad roof or allot of stuff in the front yard the Building Inspector had Probible Cause to go to the City Judge and get a Administrative Search Warrant for the premises and they would be escorted by the Police Department. And apart of that conversation was that they could seize private property. ( I don't know names sorry)The Two Councelwomen were against it because of concerns,  the Counselman were for it at the end i think they put it off until the next meeting.

Offline laciesmom

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 508
  • Karma: +64678/-4
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #3 on: February 29, 2008, 04:12:28 AM »
Before I start my tirade, let me state I do Not live in the city limits.  The areas around me have been but I chose not to annex into the city.  Believe me every night in my prayers I think God we made that chose.  First of all their Yard Nazies was bad enough but I can't believe any city in the United States would even consider this moronic idea.  Exactly who do they think they are and where do they think they live? The last time I checked my address was Waynesville Missouri not Waynesville USSR!!!!  I believe when the Yard Nazies started I made a comment about what next. If we allow them to do this just what would they try next.   Well now we know.  This is exactly what happens when we allow City Government to think they are running a gated community.  Wake up Waynesville citizens before they are telling you how to arrange your furniture and what color to paint your rooms.  I can only say anyone who allows them to actually consider this deserves what they get.  The ones of you who do NOT want to live this way, get legal assistance NOW before they are living in your house.
Real love stories never have endings.
Richard Bach

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2008, 10:59:04 AM »
Hmmm. The "right" to seize property?  Theft.

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2008, 02:26:38 PM »
I would suggest getting some facts from the City Counsel before folks start going off the deep end over this.  Same kind of information started the thread about the clean up ordnance until people found out all the facts, then it kind of died down.

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2008, 05:07:56 PM »
02Tundra, I agree.  Notice my (for once!) muted replies on this issue.  When I first read it here, I figured it was all about the nuisances (you know, what was called the yard nazis. HO Hum.  Glad I am in the county and out of the city.

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #7 on: February 29, 2008, 06:22:42 PM »
Matrsnot:  I also wish I was in a part of the County that didn't have the Sewer District, because they can not seem to fix that mess they have created over there.  There are times I wish I lived in another County, because of all the screwed up stuff that just keeps happening here in Pulaski County.  I sometimes just want to scream I get so frustrated.

Offline Irish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +7997/-61
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2008, 08:36:21 PM »
If the ord were passed, then the buidling inspector could apply to the Municipal or Circuit Judge for a administrative search warrant.  He would have to provide a statement of probable cause, basically convince the Judge that there was a health/safety problem that needed to be addressed, then IF the warrant was granted, it would have to be served within 10 days, during daylight hours.  A member of the Waynesville Police Department would have to accompany the Inspector.  The reason for the Police Officer being there is to keep the peace, not search for evidence of a criminal act.  Granted if they found evidence of criminal activity, that would change things.  The warrant could only be applied for after a good faith attempt to gain the property owner's cooperation failed.  This is not an "end-around" thing, but a way to protect the citizen's rights.  If you looked at the city ord you would find that it already calls for this action.  This new ord just clears up the procedures.  And as a afterthought, I wore the uniform of the US Army for more than 20 years, do not really appreciate being refered to as a Nazi, feel free to disagree with me, but try to be an adult, and quit the petty name calling.
 
Ed Conley, Alderman, City of Waynesville
PS: This is my personal view, and not that of the entire council.

Offline Yankee Trader

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 2028
  • Karma: +470557/-165
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2008, 09:07:53 PM »
Ed does Waynesville  have a dedicated fulltime building inspector?  Are they certified?  My ex was an inspector in one of the KC burbs and she was always going to classes, seminars etc. to keep up her cert/training.

Just curious for the citizens peace of mind.

Offline Irish

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +7997/-61
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2008, 12:31:13 AM »
SHort answer.  Yes

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2008, 01:17:21 AM »
Ed, I was referring to a previous statement regarding the nuisance committee made by another member on this board.  While I am not currently affected, I would like you to clear up the statement about seizing property.  I think that is important and I look at it as theft by taking under color of law.  So be assured I was not calling anyone here a nazi. 

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2008, 02:04:18 AM »
I hope this will add some clarity to what Irish has said, and help dispel any rumors or uninformed experts that want to confuse what was discussed last night by the City Council. The matter at hand concerning administrative warrants deals primarily with those violations that can be seen from the public right-of-way without entering the property (that would be TRESPASSING). The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to provide a means for the city building inspector to legally enter private property for the sole purpose of removing a violation (nuisance or property maintenance code) that the property owner refuses to remove themself after having been duly notified and given the opportunity to appeal. When the violation is removed by the city, a special tax is assessed against the property to recoup the money that was expended by the city to remove the violation.

If after the process of notification and appeal has come and gone and the violation still exists, then the building inspector must take actions on behalf of the city to remove the violation that the resident, tenant or owner refuses to have removed. The building inspector must ASK PERMISSION of the tenants, resident and/or owner occupying the space to enter the property to remove the violation. If he his refused entry to the property, the city building inspector will then request for an administrative warrant from the judge to remove the violation. The inspector must have "PROBABLE CAUSE" before an administrative warrant can be issued. Without being able to prove to the judge that a specific violation(s) of the building code, property maintenance code or nuisance code exists to get an administrative warrant, the city building inspector will not be able to LEGALLY search the property in question or enter the property and have the violation abated by removing/correcting the violation that exists. This is easy enough to prove because these violations are in plain sight, with photographs being taken to prove the inspectors case. Remember, only those violations that can be seen from the public right-of-way or from an adjoining property owners property who has given permission to the inspector to enter their property is ripe for an admin warrant.

The request for an administrative warrant must state clearly what the specific code violations are that requires the warrant, what specific area is to be inspected, what specifically is being inspected, and what specific abatement/removal action is being taken on behalf of the city to remove the violation. The seizing or taking of any property is only limited to those items that are in violation of the code or regulation (i.e. cutting grass/weeds, removing derelict vehicles, removing trash/debris, removing any unsafe/unhealthy condition) on the EXTERIOR of the premises.

The guidelines for getting an administrative warrant for inspection of the interior of structures is more difficult since the building inspector has to convince the judge that an violation exists that he CAN NOT see from the public right-of-way.

This ordinance will PROTECT the rights of the resident, tenant and/or owner's from ILLEGAL trespass, inspection and abatement; and provide the legal means for the city inspector to abate an unsafe/unhealthy condition that exists that the resident, tenant and/or owner's have refused to remove. The Police Officer will be present to ensure that the abatement process is not hindered or tempers do not get out of hand.

Anyone who tries to convince the residents of Waynesville that we are creating a POLICE STATE have ulterior motives behind their argument and are decieving the public about what this whole abatement process is truthfully about. I can promise each and everyone of you on this site that if a city official in any capacity tries to misuse the building code or nuisance ordinance to harass, intimidate or unfairly restrict a property owners rights in any way, I will personally make a point of getting the regulation/code repealed and step down from the city council in protest.

Offline laciesmom

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 508
  • Karma: +64678/-4
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2008, 08:03:32 AM »
This all sounds really good Semper Fi, but what right does anyone on the board in any city, town or community have in telling people what they can or can not have in their own yard that they pay for with money they earn??  What is cute to some is ugly to others, so what you are saying is you feel all of you have the right to decide this for everyone else.  Some how I feel this does cross the line on what our rights are.  No I have no ulterior motive behind my remarks I just really feel no one has the right to tell me what I do or don't put on my own property.  You are authorized your own opinion the same as I am authorized mine.  If I wanted someone to tell me what my yard should look like I would have bought a condo or a home in a gated community.  I really feel that the city council has over stepped their bounds and continue to find new ways to take away the rights of the people who reside in the city limits.  Which as stated before I don't and never want to.JMO
I hope this will add some clarity to what Irish has said, and help dispel any rumors or uninformed experts that want to confuse what was discussed last night by the City Council. The matter at hand concerning administrative warrants deals primarily with those violations that can be seen from the public right-of-way without entering the property (that would be TRESPASSING). The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to provide a means for the city building inspector to legally enter private property for the sole purpose of removing a violation (nuisance or property maintenance code) that the property owner refuses to remove themself after having been duly notified and given the opportunity to appeal. When the violation is removed by the city, a special tax is assessed against the property to recoup the money that was expended by the city to remove the violation.

If after the process of notification and appeal has come and gone and the violation still exists, then the building inspector must take actions on behalf of the city to remove the violation that the resident, tenant or owner refuses to have removed. The building inspector must ASK PERMISSION of the tenants, resident and/or owner occupying the space to enter the property to remove the violation. If he his refused entry to the property, the city building inspector will then request for an administrative warrant from the judge to remove the violation. The inspector must have "PROBABLE CAUSE" before an administrative warrant can be issued. Without being able to prove to the judge that a specific violation(s) of the building code, property maintenance code or nuisance code exists to get an administrative warrant, the city building inspector will not be able to LEGALLY search the property in question or enter the property and have the violation abated by removing/correcting the violation that exists. This is easy enough to prove because these violations are in plain sight, with photographs being taken to prove the inspectors case. Remember, only those violations that can be seen from the public right-of-way or from an adjoining property owners property who has given permission to the inspector to enter their property is ripe for an admin warrant.

The request for an administrative warrant must state clearly what the specific code violations are that requires the warrant, what specific area is to be inspected, what specifically is being inspected, and what specific abatement/removal action is being taken on behalf of the city to remove the violation. The seizing or taking of any property is only limited to those items that are in violation of the code or regulation (i.e. cutting grass/weeds, removing derelict vehicles, removing trash/debris, removing any unsafe/unhealthy condition) on the EXTERIOR of the premises.

The guidelines for getting an administrative warrant for inspection of the interior of structures is more difficult since the building inspector has to convince the judge that an violation exists that he CAN NOT see from the public right-of-way.

This ordinance will PROTECT the rights of the resident, tenant and/or owner's from ILLEGAL trespass, inspection and abatement; and provide the legal means for the city inspector to abate an unsafe/unhealthy condition that exists that the resident, tenant and/or owner's have refused to remove. The Police Officer will be present to ensure that the abatement process is not hindered or tempers do not get out of hand.

Anyone who tries to convince the residents of Waynesville that we are creating a POLICE STATE have ulterior motives behind their argument and are decieving the public about what this whole abatement process is truthfully about. I can promise each and everyone of you on this site that if a city official in any capacity tries to misuse the building code or nuisance ordinance to harass, intimidate or unfairly restrict a property owners rights in any way, I will personally make a point of getting the regulation/code repealed and step down from the city council in protest.
Real love stories never have endings.
Richard Bach

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2008, 12:03:11 PM »
SemperFi, I disagree with your statement regarding a Police State.  I have no ulterior motives.  All too often, elected officials see themselves as big fish in a small pond.  It is perceived power.  While all seem to have nothing but good intentions, there are those who would abuse this perceived power.  I say perceived, because that is all it is.  I stayed out of the city for good reason.  Please also remember that even though it may not affect me now, I still have the responsibility to say something before it gets out of hand.  The sheep will say nothing unless it directly affects them.  When their time comes, there will be nobody to say something to.  There is no such thing as an Administrative search warrant and you should not create such a thing.  It is an excuse for the police to come on property to "look around" and perhaps "find" something to go back for a different kind of warrant.  So, in effect the council is creating a police state.  Give them an excuse to look around and then say they have probable cause to search.  Sorry.  I still maintain my right to privacy and that includes uninvited "guests".  It also includes my right to escort them off my property immediately, if not sooner.  I do not care if they are wearing a uniform either. Trespassing is trespassing regardless.  Hope I have expressed myself here without anyone feeling threatened.  That is not my intent.  My intent is to express my disagreement with what is already obvious to me.  Nobody is asking for resignations.  Too damn much governmental insinuation and interference into our lives already. 

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2008, 02:50:41 PM »
Matrsnot I agree with you wholeheartedly, and my piece was directed at neither you or laciesmom. I am entering this discussion to help quell any misperceptions that WILL be raised by those inside the City of Waynesville who will distort and misrepresent the facts.
The police have no play in this matter as this is an administrative matter specifically pertaining to code enforcement and not criminal activities. I sponsored the nuisance ordinance we now have in the city because we have some very serious problems that have gotten out of hand and others who were shown favoritism over others. This admin warrant is specifically for use by municipal building departments to be used as the LAST resort to get problem properties violations corrected and that was determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. This is not a criminal action that requires a different type of warrant that the building inspector has no part in. This is also a much needed ordinance to ensure that any potential reckless behavior by building inspectors is put in check. The Police would only be there to issue the warrant and ensure that process of removing the hazard is unimpeded.
I will go to my grave defending your property rights guaranteed to you and all of us under the Constitution, and I will defend everyone's right living outside the city limits to live the way they so choose. I do support this ordinance and the nuisance ordinance and property maintenance code that we have already adopted for the city and have always been opposed to this kind of regulatory action in the county. But we have folks within this city that will happily run properties and neighborhoods into the ground to suit their personal wants and not have any concern with the livability or future suitability of Waynesville. That I can not ignore leave as the "status quo" nor let a handful of people ruin this community for the rest. Some of these areas have gotten so bad that they are now overrun with drugs and sheer blighted conditions and other criminal activity. Good property maintenance code and nuisance abtement eliminates that problem as well. As far as I'm concerned that is the fault of each member of the City Councilman for letting that happen. I have made that point very clear publicly, and will continue to do so.
But, I will not let these codes/regulations be used or selectively used to trample on peoples rights, or used as a tool to put someone out of business. I would seek to have those regulations repealed first. I have worked with the city inspector to ensure that he understands the right right way of doing abatement's. I can do this intellegently because I am code certified to do so. I spent 20 years in the Marine Corps to protect our citizens rights, and that is no hollow rhetoric. You and I know what the outcome would be with a POLICE STATE and YARD NAZIS (that phrase I take extreme offense to) and so does Irish. This a measure to firstly protect the rights of the property owner, and still enable the BUILDING INSPECTOR to abate any unsafe/unhealthy conditions that the owner's/resident/tenant refuses to.

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2008, 04:13:20 PM »
Irish, you and I put in well over 60+years collectively to defend our rights.  I hope others here will see the larger picture here after our discussion.  I still think there is too much government involvement.  The over-run with drugs statement though.... Well tell the police to get out there and arrest the criminals.  I am talking in the city now.  they spend a lot of time doing traffic enforcement and that is PART of their job.  They have the monies the sheriff does not, so they should be doing some investigations and arrests.  Not hearing much about that in the local paper though.  Now that I received a reasonable explanation, I will leave this to rest and hope others will read your explanation.
As a post script, WHAT building codes? if there are, they have never been shown to me.  There are houses there built well before building codes were established.  Anyone ever hear of ex post facto?

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #17 on: March 04, 2008, 09:17:03 PM »
I believe it's about time Waynesville really started getting this problem addressed, it has been a major problem for years now.  I can understand using this warrant as a last resort to get a homeowner's trash cleaned up, I hope you don't have to use it often.  But knowing about all the hell that was raised when you started getting on to folks about cleaning up their messes, I'm sure there will be some to deal with.  Good luck to you, I'm glad we got the whole story on here.  I don't like going off the deep end until I get a better feel for the facts.

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2008, 01:12:32 AM »
Ok, I read the paper tonight.  Now the council is seeking to get influence out of the city limits by asking about county ordinances and such.  THAT is not in the line we were discussing earlier.  I live in the county.  I have no worry that anyone will come to my home and tell me to move one damn thing.  In the meantime, city council needs to keep inside the city limits.  Anyone coming to my home with one of these so called warrants will be met with force.  I also saw where they can "confiscate" property they think is illegal.  That is theft.  Under color of law, but still theft.  I doubt many here know it, but a civilian CAN own legally, an automatic weapon if he/she so desires.  There is a protocol that has to be followed, but it is legal.  Anyone trying to break into my home with such a warrant will rue the day they tried.  That is plain fact.  I will not put up with mini-despots trying to flex their muscles outside their given boundaries.  Read the paper people and you will see they are attempting to get their little law beyond the city limits.   I am thoroughly disgusted with this turn of events.  Show me how I am wrong Semper Fi and Irish.  It is there in black and white for all of us to see.  I have never been so pi$$ed in my life as to see this.  A police state is exactly what is being worked toward.  Clinton and Barama would be proud.  Government has NO business telling any of us how to live.  Better really get your ducks in order before you try this.  And for the record, my rights are already protected and I don't need any ordinance to protect them. 
For example, there are a couple of businesses along 17 going toward Buckhorn.  They abut the road the city claims as city property.  Now are these guys gonna be harrassed because one has lawnmowers in his yard and the other is a junk business?  These properties are NOT part of the city limit, but....  Think about it.  One step at a time you will encroach upon people's properties telling what they can and cannot have or do.  Don't give one inch or a mile will be taken.  One lot out of the city limits and you think you can try to dictate?   That is what you are proposing, if you can get Bill Farnham to find some obscure county ordinance.   So where does it stop?  It doesn't.  Clear and simple to me.  There is no gray area here.  All black and white with no margin of error.  Mostly I am upset because I feel I was lied to (by omission).  if any come to my home, I will take all legal actions necessary to ensure they dont' get in. 

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2008, 11:50:24 AM »
The building inspectors WILL NOT seize any property except for those items that are specifically laid out in an abatement order that pose a hazard. This is in those cases when the owner refuses to comply with an order to correct an unhealthy or unsafe condition that they have created. Building inspectors are not in the POILICE business. The Police department matters are separate from the building department. I read the article in last nights paper and this is from last Thursday nights council meeting. Hence my reason for clarifying the purpose of the admin warrant. Matrsnot you angst is justified when the council can not clearly explain the EXACT reason why something is being done to pass an ordinance. Read carefully what you see in the paper because there are special and personal interests that are involved with some who would make you believe we are either Nazis or running a Police State. I still stand by my position in my first response to this matter, and abuse of anyone's rights will not be tolerated. But neither will continuing to turn a deaf ear or blind eye to the blighting problems that have allowed to be created in this community. We have greater problems right now than getting someone to cut their grass. Serious problems to be sure.

Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2008, 01:28:20 PM »
Semper Fi, that is not what is in the paper.  They gave a "for instance", using the theft of an automatic weapon, and I will continue to call it just that.  Theft.  Extending beyond the city limits is not acceptable either.  And that too is in the paper.  It either needs to be refuted or I can let stand what I have said too.  I understand the blight at some places.  I also remember last year when the Nuisance committee singled out one individual and it made the front page of the paper.  I am tired of special interests and someone in their wanting to go after a specific individual, which is what will happen, while those in good stead with the city will continue to go on about their merry way.  The Anderson property is an example.  I notice you said nothing about the properties I mentioned up 17 either.  Doing something just because they happen to be on a road the city claimed is not reason to put them out of businesses they have had for years.  While I am at it, I think the area behind Witmore Farms is becoming blighted too.  They have stripped the forestry and made no effort to start building.  I am giving you guys something to think about.  One idiot can cause much harm.  A building inspector walks into a house, with or without the police and gets shot.  Then what?  Heard of the Castle Doctrine?  He is not a cop doing a cops job.  Stepping into a gray area, but I think you get the picture.  I wrote extensively last night and you have seen my comments there too.  The sheep may be afraid to speak up.  I am not.  I consider myself to be a SheepDog

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2008, 06:27:53 PM »
The article said "The problem is even worse in the unincorporated parts of Pulaski County, France said, noting an abandoned house just outside the Waynesville city limits that he said has become a private dump with fluids leaking into the Waynesville drainage system." concerning this one house.  They mention, they wished the County had an ordnance and were going to ask Bill Farnham to check it out.  I don't know what house this is, but if it's turning into a private dump site, why wouldn't the citizen's of Waynesville want their elected officials to inquire about how or if the County could address cleaning it up with the owner, because it's affecting the city?

Now, if I start to see housing inspector's coming out to my home looking around, then I'll start building my fighting position and stocking up on ammo to ensure I can withstand the onslaught of NAZIS' coming to take my rights away.

Bottom line is that I think the city is attempting to get some of these places cleaned up.  Many citizen's have worked with the city and have made great progress of the mess they started with.  The big problem is those few people that don't want to work with anyone, because they just don't want to work with anyone to improve the city of Waynesville.  This town has a lot of potential, and with it's citizen's involvement, that potential can be exploited.



Offline matrsnot

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 7612
  • Karma: +489606/-6227
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #22 on: March 06, 2008, 06:40:43 PM »
I sent you a PM 02

Offline 02Tundra

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 662
  • Karma: +9924/-20
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #23 on: March 06, 2008, 06:52:15 PM »
I sent you a PM 02

Matrsnot:  Got it and have responded. 

Offline Timbo

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Karma: +506/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #24 on: March 06, 2008, 07:32:48 PM »
Section 3 of the Ordinance reads: Any application for an administrative search warrant and/or a warrent of entry shall contain a statement of probable cause, supported by affidavit, detailing the actual or SUSPECTED property conditions-whether applicable to a specific property or a GENERAL AREA-that justify entry onto private property.
Somewhat vague in my opinion. I fully support the clean up efforts but I think this goes to far. I have no doubt that the supporters of this ordinance have the best of intentions but the ordinance will be around long after they are gone. This thing has the potential to be out of control. There have to be better ways to deal with the problems.

Offline littlebit

  • Cunning Linguist
  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 12946
  • Karma: +2370369/-241
  • Gender: Male
  • Home is what you make it.
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #25 on: March 06, 2008, 11:10:04 PM »
Excellent post Timbo.

+ Karma for you.
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.

I'd give my left arm to be ambidextrous...


“The truth is, everyone is going to end up hurting you. You just have to find the ones who are worth suffering for.”

Offline laciesmom

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 508
  • Karma: +64678/-4
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #26 on: March 06, 2008, 11:22:02 PM »
As I have said before, if we don't stand up for our RIGHTS no one else is going to.  If we allow it to happen to one or two what will stop it from being 100 or 200 people we do have rights.  This group of people are authorized their opinions of what is right or wrong but so do we.  Big Brother just continues to take over ours lives a little more each day, so how much more involved would you like them to be involved.  As for me, I beleive this over steps the bounds this group of people should have.  Just because I think something looks bad doesn't mean you think it looks bad.  So how can this group decide for all of us?   
Real love stories never have endings.
Richard Bach

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #27 on: March 07, 2008, 08:38:34 AM »
Here is the first of a two part narrative to provide background on the city's AUTHORITY to protect the health, welafare and safety of its residents and the community as a whole:

Title 49 > Subtitle VI > Part C > Chapter 327 > Section 32707
§ 32707. Administrative warrants

(a) Definition.— In this section, “probable cause” means a valid public interest in the effective enforcement of this chapter or a regulation prescribed under this chapter sufficient to justify the inspection or impoundment in the circumstances stated in an application for a warrant under this section.
(b) Warrant Requirement and Issuance.—
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (4) of this subsection, an inspection or impoundment under section 32706 of this title may be carried out only after a warrant is obtained.
(2) A judge of a court of the United States or a State court of record or a United States magistrate may issue a warrant for an inspection or impoundment under section 32706 of this title within the territorial jurisdiction of the court or magistrate. The warrant must be based on an affidavit that—
(A) establishes probable cause to issue the warrant; and
(B) is sworn to before the judge or magistrate by an officer or employee who knows the facts alleged in the affidavit.
(3) The judge or magistrate shall issue the warrant when the judge or magistrate decides there is a reasonable basis for believing that probable cause exists to issue the warrant. The warrant must—
(A) identify the premises, property, or motor vehicle to be inspected and the items or type of property to be impounded;
(B) state the purpose of the inspection, the basis for issuing the warrant, and the name of the affiant;
(C) direct an individual authorized under section 32706 of this title to inspect the premises, property, or vehicle for the purpose stated in the warrant and, when appropriate, to impound the property specified in the warrant;
(D) direct that the warrant be served during the hours specified in the warrant; and
(E) name the judge or magistrate with whom proof of service is to be filed.
(4) A warrant under this section is not required when—
(A) the owner, operator, or agent in charge of the premises consents;
(B) it is reasonable to believe that the mobility of the motor vehicle to be inspected makes it impractical to obtain a warrant;
(C) an application for a warrant cannot be made because of an emergency;
(D) records are to be inspected and copied under section 32706 (e)(1)(A) of this title; or
(E) a warrant is not constitutionally required.
(c) Service and Impoundment of Property.—
(1) A warrant issued under this section must be served and proof of service filed not later than 10 days after its issuance date. The judge or magistrate may allow additional time in the warrant if the Secretary of Transportation demonstrates a need for additional time. Proof of service must be filed promptly with a written inventory of the property impounded under the warrant. The inventory shall be made in the presence of the individual serving the warrant and the individual from whose possession or premises the property was impounded, or if that individual is not present, a credible individual except the individual making the inventory. The individual serving the warrant shall verify the inventory. On request, the judge or magistrate shall send a copy of the inventory to the individual from whose possession or premises the property was impounded and to the applicant for the warrant.
(2) When property is impounded under a warrant, the individual serving the warrant shall—
(A) give the person from whose possession or premises the property was impounded a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property; or
(B) leave the copy and receipt at the place from which the property was impounded.
(3) The judge or magistrate shall file the warrant, proof of service, and all documents filed about the warrant with the clerk of the United States district court for the judicial district in which the inspection is made.

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #28 on: March 07, 2008, 08:41:43 AM »
The following Revised Statues of Missouri are provided as the AUTHORITY for the city to adopt nuisance ordinances and building codes:

RsMO 67.398 - Debris on property, ordinance may require abatement--abatement for vacant building in Kansas City--effect of failure to remove nuisance, penalties.

RsMO 67.400 - Ordinance may require vacation, demolition or repair of structures, when.

 RsMO 67.410 - Provisions required in ordinance.

RsMO 67.420 - Ordinance may provide penalties for noncompliance or delay.

RsMO 67.430 - Appeal must be authorized.

RsMO 67.440 - Emergency powers may be authorized.

RsMO 67.450 - Liability of subdivision for wrongful action.

RsMO 71.285 -Weeds or trash, city may cause removal and issue tax bill, when--certain cities may order abatement and remove weeds or trash, when--section not to apply to certain cities, when--city official may order abatement in certain cities--removal of weeds or trash, costs.

RsMO 71.780  - Nuisances--expense of suppression, how paid.

RsMO 77.500 - May also regulate and control the construction of buildings.

RsMO 77.590  - Council may make ordinances and rules and regulations and establish penalties for violation.

Offline Semper Fi

  • Registered User
  • ******************
  • Posts: 51
  • Karma: +241/-1
    • View Profile
Re: City Of Waynesville and Administrative Search Warrants
« Reply #29 on: March 07, 2008, 09:08:39 AM »
In summation, the measures taken and being taken by the Council are for the improvement of the livability and viability of the City of Waynesville. The regulations and codes WILL NOT be used to harass the residents or business owners, or used to put a business owner out of business.

They will not be administered or enforced upon ANYONE outside the corporate city limits of Waynesville. When I sponsored the nuisance ordinance, I intentionally left out the city's ability to regulate nuisances within 1/2 mile OUTSIDE the city limits. Even though that authority is granted to a third class city, that is not the city's place to deal with properties in the areas outside the city. It's not realistic for one, and not within our moral right as a city for two IMO.

They will be administered and enforced within the city limits, and it is the responsibility of the Mayor, City Council and city staff to ensure that it is done knowledgeably, fairly, transparently and properly to protect the rights of the offending party as well as the rights of the rest of residents who have to tolerate the blight conditions everyday. But it will be done correctly and the small fraction of people it has a material effect on will cry foul the loudest.

Honest people can tour this city and see that this has been needed for a long, long time. Residents have a right to disagree, elected officials should debate the matter HONESTLY. But putting special/personal interests above the interests and needs of the community is self-serving at the least and unethical at the worst. How can elected officials continue to spout the need for economic growth and prosperity, but sacrifice and neglect the livability and viability of this community to achieve that goal? Because that does happen routinely, and far to often by some.

Hope this helps the some folks understand what the city council is trying to accomplish at the request/needs of the vast majority of the residents of the city who can not tolerate the continued ruination of this city any longer.