Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permit Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges permit enforcement failures; county staff say review found no violations
Summary
During public comment a resident alleged the county's Clermont Cares complaint received no timely response and that a property owner performed work without an appropriate WMSC permit; county staff said prior staff review found no enforceable violations and prosecutor's office stated it represents the department's factual record.
A Williamsburg resident told the Clermont County Board of Commissioners on Nov. 19 he believes the county failed to respond as promised to a Clermont Cares complaint and that a neighboring property owner completed work without proper WMSC permitting.
Dan Day, who provided his address to the board, said he filed a Clermont Cares complaint on Oct. 15 and received a receipt stamped Oct. 20 but no subsequent written county response within the 10‑day timeframe the county's materials promise. He alleged the work damaged his property (erosion and sediment entering a water feature) and told the board he had sought records showing the permit status and could not find supporting documents at the time he first checked.
County staff responded in the meeting. Chris McClintock, community and economic development director, told Day and the board that a prior staff meeting with building‑department officials found no violations. A prosecutor's office representative said the prosecutor represents the building department as its client and can only act on the facts presented by that department; he also said he could not provide legal advice in that forum to a private citizen. The chair invited the prosecutor and staff to follow up with Mr. Day after the meeting.
Day reiterated his contention that a permit was improperly claimed and that, according to his records request, a permit document appeared after his request; county staff acknowledged the complaint and that staff had met with Day previously but said the matter currently lacked a prosecutable violation based on their review.
What happens next: The chair opened the record for further staff follow-up and the prosecutor's office and building-department staff said they would meet with the resident outside the public meeting to discuss the file and next steps. The board then moved to executive session for unrelated personnel matters and reported no decisions on the permit issue in open session.
Quoted on the record: "It's been 4 weeks since the receipt was sent and absolutely no contact to address the concerns," Day said during his public comment. County staff responded that prior staff review did not find violations and that the prosecutor's office represents the department’s factual record.
