Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Live Oak council directs manager to explore adding assistant for code enforcement
Summary
The City of Live Oak council voted June 10 to allow the city manager and finance director to explore options for adding an assistant position in the code enforcement department for the upcoming budget, citing a two‑year backlog and limited staff capacity.
The City of Live Oak council on June 10 approved a motion to allow the city manager and finance director to explore options for adding an assistant position in the code enforcement department and to present findings during the upcoming budget process.
Council members said the department is understaffed and that a single code enforcement officer is struggling to keep up after roughly two years of backlog. Councilmember said, "we allow our city manager to explore options for adding an assistant position for the code enforcement and to present it during our budget." The motion passed on a voice vote.
Why it matters: council members described recurring property and nuisance cases that are not related to recent storms and said the current staffing level limits the city’s ability to resolve code violations and address blight. One councilmember noted that routine code hearings average about six per meeting and that, at that rate, the city would process roughly 72 hearings a year—insufficient, in the member’s view, to clear the backlog.
Council comments and clarifications centered on two points: that the request is only to explore options (not to create a new position immediately) and that the proposal is not intended to establish a condominium homeowners association or similar private enforcement structure. City Manager Sessions was named in the discussion as the staff member who would investigate options; City Clerk Joanne and relevant department staff were mentioned as consultees.
The council did not specify the proposed job classification, salary range, or the number of staff to be added. Those details were left to staff to research and return with options during the budget process. The motion was moved and seconded and approved by voice vote; specific vote counts were not recorded in the meeting transcript.
Next steps: staff were authorized to research organizational options, potential budget impacts, and any required ordinance or code changes and to report back to council during budget deliberations.
