By Pauline Masson –
Months after aldermen turned down a request from Police Chief Scott Melies to empower him to criminalize homeowners who allowed anyone, including themselves, to occupy an RV or tent on their property, the chief is now seeking special authority to police the condition of private homes and who lives there.
At the Wednesday evening board meeting, aldermen will be asked to approve a first reading of a new law, Bill 5206, that authorizes the police chief and the police department to enforce all housing and occupancy code violations.
The Code Enforcement officer who is responsible for these violations now works for the police department, but city administrator Steve Roth told aldermen that the Police Department does not have clear authority to enforce housing and occupancy codes. He said after reviewing city ordinances City Attorney Bob Jones wrote the proposed law. However, comments by alderman Scott Lesh at the last meeting indicate that the chief had requested the new law.
“This bill was drafted by the City Attorney following review of ordinance provisions relating to enforcement of the City’s building and occupancy codes,” Roth told aldermen in his memo explaining the meeting agenda. “The Police Department does not have clear authority to enforce these codes.”
Here is what Bill 5206 says:
“The Board of Aldermen has determined that the effective administration of the housing code and other ordinances of the City would be improved by clearly authorizing the Chief of Police and the Department of Police to enforce all provisions of the City’s Code and other ordinances and orders of the City.”
The bill goes on to say:
“In addition to other duties, all police officers of the City shall have the power of arrest, with or without a warrant and power to serve and execute all warrants, subpoenas, writs and other legal process.”
It is unclear what “other legal process” means.
Missouri State Statutes for cities, towns and villages, Chapter 85, gives police the power to act, but with some restrictions that attorney Jones ignored in Pacific’s bill.
Accross the state, police can make an arrest without due process but only when the offense against the law is committed in the officer’s presence.
And police are authorized to serve and execute all warrants, subpoenas, writs that are issued by the judge hearing and determining municipal ordinance violation cases.
So who should be concerned if the police chief and the police department are authorized to enforce housing and occupancy codes by an act of the aldermen?
Anyone whose house is not entirely up to code. And, remember, the building codes are written to specify conditions in new construction, not old homes. Anyone who has done some interior remodeling without a building permit, has electrical wiring or other structural elements that do not comply with codes for new construction, could be considered guilty of a building code violation.
And, if heaven forbid, an adult child or grandchild moves in with parents or grand parents – either due to a housing need or to care for elderly relatives – this could represent two families in a single family home. Under this new law the property owner faces the spectre of the police showing up to investigate the occupancy of the home – and authorized to arrest without a warrant.
The chief and city attorney can argue that is not the intent of this law. But the language of the law is clear. If it is approved, the police chief and police department are being granted the authority to investigate the condition of private homes and who lives there.
Readers can download the meeting packet and read both Steve Roth’s memo to aldermen and the actual language of the bill that aldermen will be asked to approve.
I conducted an Internet search on building code enforcement with several cities, far and near, which indicated that in most cities housing code violations and enforcement are assigned to a building department code enforcement officer that has the authority to issue violation citations – not the police. The primary goal of building code enforcement, each of these cities reported, was to correct code violations. Code enforcement officers do not show up with a badge and gun and they cannot arrest anyone.
What is truly hurtful to this reporter about this law is that Pacific residents have traditionally held the police department in high regard. I still have in my garage one of the We Support the Police yard signs that appeared in front yards all over the city through a police department fan’s campaign to show citizen support.
I do not question how the police handle enforcement of laws aimed at criminal activity – drugs, violence, theft (robbery/burglary), property damage, vehicle violations, or any acts that harm other individuals or their property.
I just do not think the police need to get involved if the grass is too high, there is too much junk in the yard, the interior of the home needs upgrading, or if the grandkids also live there. We need to leave those violations to the building code enforcement department.
Aldermen need to stop reacting to what the city administrtor and city attorney direct them to do and realize that in all legislation they are in charge. It may be time to transfer the building code enforcement officer out of the police department back upstairs to the bulding department and grant the police chief what ever authorty he needs to fight crime.
I also suggest that residents, who might be concerned about police involvement in what happens in their homes, ask their aldermen to remove occupancy and housing code enforcement from the police department and place it in the jurisdiction of the building department.
If you agree, talk to your aldermen.
He didn’t win round 1 so he came for round 2. Same thing but in different form. 3-4 months ago I called to 5 of the surrounding towns and only one had their Code Enforcement officer with the Police Dept. Maybe he should enforce the Truck traffic on Lamar and Hwy N and when he gets profient with that, add something else. I don’t think he is ready to deal with a whole other departments issues.
Chief Mellies’ operation seems to be either significantly over-staffed or unable to find anything to do that is legitimately useful to the citizens of this town.
Think for just a moment, of some of the many problems and challenges that our police officers could be tackling to make life better for all of us. I’ll quickly name just a few for example:
Increased transparency via automated publishing of a daily police report – such as arrests, warrants issued, & criminal activity (assaults, thefts, DWI).
Improve relations and presence with community organizations and schools. All of our children would benefit from feeling safer while at school.
Share the departments vision regarding the future of law enforcement in our city, such as why Chief Mellies has requested funds to purchase and install mass surveillance cameras from FLOCK and how they intend to utilize them for the public good without violating citizens rights to privacy.
See how easy that was?
Yet, rather than so much as discussing any of these topics, Chief Mellies is spending time and resources (that *we* pay for) to find a way to grant himself and his officers the power to begin arresting citizens for what they arbitrarily deem to be violations of property code.
The very idea that this ridiculous charade is being dignified by a public discussion is only eclipsed by the undeniable reality that this pedantic, shortsighted garbage has become the norm for our town’s government.
I agree with you. I think the Police Department needs to stick with more important things than building code violations. And Code Enforcement needs to be moved back to the building department. This Ordinance seems to be over the top.
Curious what power the police chief wields to have the city attorney write up a bill? The police chief should not be a law maker, rather a law enforcer. Seems he is over stepping his bounds!
So the police department already says they don’t have the time or officers to enforce safety issues like cars cutting across parking lots to avoid intersections even where children are present and sometimes playing in said parking lot, but they have time and resources to check on housing violations that aren’t true safety concerns? This seems to be getting a little ridiculous on the overreach they want in a small town.
To me even if this ordinance is passed it clearly on its face is unconstitutional and if anyone should file suit to stop its enforcement a “ preliminary injunction would be granted” and once a hearing is held on the merits a Judge would rule this proposed ordinance is a direct violation of the 4th and 14th Amendment to the Constitution which prohibits denial of due process of law and unreasonable search and seizure of one’s property and declare it unconstitutional. Why this Board of Aldermen allow “ gestapos Roth & Jones” to keep presenting this type of garbage to bring before this Board is 🗑 beyond me. Maybe one day this Board will collectively say to them both” your services are no longer needed”. We need to air out City Hall. It 😷 stinks!
Congratulations Pauline; you certainly got their attention tonight , BOA meeting 7-5, keep on watching and writing. The lawyer?, keeps trying to make Pacific like every other city around most likely because it would make his feeble mind have less remembering to do.
He should note that many move here because they wanted to live in a town that values individual freedoms that are not constantly being challenged by the local Gestapo.