Mariposa County advisory committee presses staff for clear timelines as enforcement overhaul advances

The Mariposa County Code Compliance Advisory Committee pressed county staff on Tuesday for clearer deliverables, timelines and public-facing workflow charts as members advance a package of enforcement changes.

Staff described a multi-year effort to repeal and replace zoning enforcement language in code section 17.144 and to move enforcement procedures into Title 1, using a non‑punitive administrative abatement track intended to protect due process while avoiding fines. Planning staff cited Government Code 25845 and Government Code 27720 as models discussed by the ad hoc drafting group.

"The result was a list of kind of actionable items as part of the minute record, for repeal and replacement of 17.144," a planning staff member said while summarizing the history and the committee's role in shaping recommendations to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.

Committee members repeatedly said the record to date is muddled and asked for a single, discrete checklist of what the committee has recommended, what staff has implemented and what remains outstanding. "We need timelines. We need deliverables," one member said, pressing staff to provide a concise work plan that trustees and the public can follow.

Members raised several recurring concerns: permit fees perceived as "exorbitant," opaque permit timelines, the need for a tiered enforcement approach (warning, voluntary abatement, then administrative steps), and clearer public resources explaining how to address common code issues.

An ad hoc subgroup updating Title 1 said it is working to embed due-process protections into the new enforcement structure. That group discussed hearing-board options — including a hearing officer or a panel similar to a building-appeals board — and plans to consider how amnesty could be incorporated. The ad hoc plans to meet again next Friday to continue drafting.

Division staff also presented a case-log update. Bart, who is managing case intake and tracking, told the committee that after scanning historical records and reconciling data, "Currently there's 526 open cases in Tyler." He described common case types as "building without permit" conversions, junk/debris and health-and-safety problems such as failing septic systems, and said many older cases may be closed quickly after records are processed.

Bart described earlier counts that showed 158 open cases since January with 151 closed and said that once records are fully entered and reviewed there are likely 75–100 cases that could be closed relatively quickly. He emphasized that many complaints involve multiple overlapping issues and that staff often resolves cases through communication and cooperation with property owners.

Public comment included a resident who said a private property on Slaughterhouse Road had accumulated large amounts of appliances and asked whether volunteer cleanup or a formal abatement process was needed; staff and committee members offered to put him in touch with the property owner and county staff.

Procedurally, the committee moved to table approval of Sept. 12 minutes because several members who had attended that meeting were excused and others preferred to review the audio before adopting final minutes. The committee then received the ad hoc update and the case‑log presentation and voted to adjourn.

What happens next: staff agreed to return with a concise list of discrete changes tied to departments, provide a timeline for the AVA program referenced in the packet, and include a clearer breakdown of fees and the case counts at the committee's next meeting. The ad hoc committee will meet next Friday to continue drafting Title 1 enforcement language.