From the Styx by Peggy Tibbetts

As I mentioned last week, the Recall Committee has been investigating some complaints we have received. All of the complainants have asked that their names be withheld.

A Silt business owner has reported to us that last summer (2006) Mayor Moore built a fence without a permit and the fence might be on the Siltwood property adjacent to Center Townhomes.

Mayor Moore built this fence in 2006 without a permit.

We put in a CORA request for a “copy of the fence permit for the new fence installed in the northeast corner of the Center Townhomes development next to the town alley running east and west”.

We learned that “no permit was issued for the fence in question”.

However Silt Municipal Code requires permits for new fences.

15.06.020 Permit required for fences, retaining walls and screening devices.
A. A permit is required for all new fences, retaining walls and screening devices;

Mayor Moore built the fence without a permit, which is a violation of Silt Municipal Code.

Because there was no permit, no survey was done so there’s no way to determine whether the fence is on Moore’s property or the neighbor’s property.

On August 23, Chief Burris told Tod Tibbetts that the Mayor is going to tear the fence down.

As of today, the fence is still standing.

I haven’t been able to find anyone else in Silt besides Dave Moore who dared to build a fence without a permit. So I’m not sure what happens if someone builds a fence without a permit.  Two years ago Ema and Tim Kwiatkowski built a fence. A police officer stopped by and asked to see their permit because he couldn’t see it in the place where it was posted. So at least we know that permits are checked. Evidently Mayor Moore’s permit was never checked when he was observed building that fence because if it had been checked, it would have been determined that he did not actually have a permit. 

I don’t know whether Mayor Moore received preferential treatment about the fence. The point is, he built a fence without a permit. As far as I know he has not received a citation. Building a fence without a permit is not a “procedural mistake”. It’s a violation of Silt Municipal Code. Even if the fence is torn down, it’s still a violation.

Street Closure

On August 17, a real estate agent, a contractor, and a citizen reported to us that a section of the street was closed off on Domelby Court in Center Townhomes. 

Domelby Court street closure on August 18, 2007

We put in a CORA request for a “copy of the street closure permit issued for the street closure … on Domelby Court”.

We learned “no closure permit was issued”.

Silt Municipal Code prohibits such activity without written permission from the town. 

12.08.010 Permission required–Restoration by town.

A. No person shall: (1) Make any excavation, drain or ditch in, or (2) lay, construct or place any culvert, pipe, rock, gravel, fill dirt, or other thing or item in, or (3) injure, encroach upon, obstruct, tear up, or affect in any other manner, any pavement, sidewalk, ditch, drainage way, street, alley, or other public way or any easement or right-of-way dedicated to the use of the public or designated for public use, without first, in each and every instance, having obtained written permission from the town and having complied with all other applicable ordinances of the town pertaining thereto.

B. Upon the town’s determination that a person is violating, or attempting to violate, the provisions of subsection A of this section, the town has the right to remove or cause to be removed forthwith from, and to restore or cause to be restored to its prior condition, any pavement, sidewalk, ditch, drainage way, street, alley or other public way or any easement or right-of-way dedicated to the use of the public or designated for public use, any culvert, pipe, rock, gravel, fill dirt, or other thing or item laid, constructed or placed in, or obstructing, encroaching upon, or affecting in any manner, any of such areas. Prior to such removal and restoration, the town shall attempt to notify by the most expedient means possible, the person causing or responsible for such condition existing in contravention of this section, in order that such person may expeditiously and without delay carry out such removal and restoration. Failure to actually notify such person shall not prevent the town from effecting such removal and restoration. The person or persons so causing or responsible for such condition existing in contravention of this section shall pay upon demand of the town all costs incurred by the town, including legal expenses and attorney’ s fees, in effecting such removal and restoration and in enforcing the provisions hereof. (Ord. 5, Series of 1983 § 1)

Mayor Moore’s closure of Domelby Court without written permission is a violation of Silt Municipal Code. Not a “procedural mistake.” 

Today this “Road Closed” sign is still posted. The huge dirt pile is gone but the street has not been restored.

A local contractor told us that he wouldn’t be caught dead dumping dirt on a city street anywhere in this valley without a permit. He added that when his company does disturb a city street with a permit, rarely is it blocked for more than 72 hours and is restored within a week.

A Silt developer told us that when his contractor does any work on existing streets in Silt, his company has to provide a detailed plan and post a bond before they can do anything.

Let’s play guess the quote.

Who said: “Any violation by the Mayor or Trustee should receive the same penalty as anyone else who would violate any ordinance. And I am sure that the trustees and mayor agree with the aforementioned, that ordinances are meant to be followed.”

Did you guess Mayor Moore?

Yup, that’s right.

Last year, prior to the 2006 Town of Silt elections, when Dave Moore was running for mayor, he sent an email about the placement of election signs.

From: Dave Moore
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 11:48 AM
To: Janet Aluise
Cc: Rick Aluise
Subject: Election
March 09, 2006

Dear Janet,

Thanks for up dating me on the proper procedure in placing election signage. I believe that the ordinances are to be followed, and that ignorance is again no excuse.

Just a word of brief explanation. As I was placing these signs I was wondering what the ordinance was relative to my sign placement. So I drove right over to City Hall and asked Sheila, however she referred me to you. You were in a meeting so I left you a message to contact me tomorrow. We did touch base this morning and I have been made clear of what the ordinance says.

I will immediately remove any signs (2-4) which may be in public right a way. I do have plenty of permission for placement of these signs on private property. These signs will have only been place less than 12 hours and the balk of that time was night. And had you not been in meeting I would have removed them immediately. And again I want to thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Being in perfect agreement that if any one should follow the ordinances per jot and tittle, it should be the Trustees and Mayor. And I also believe that any violation by the Mayor or Trustee should receive the same penalty as anyone else who would violate any ordinance. And I am sure that the trustees and mayor agree with the aforementioned, that ordinances are meant to be followed.

Dave 

Then Trustee Dave Moore said the trustees and mayor show follow the ordinances “per jot and tittle”. And furthermore they should be treated like “anyone else who would violate any ordinance”.

Interesting.

I was intrigued by the term “jot and tittle”. I assumed it’s biblical but couldn’t find it in my King James Version. So I looked it up at Wikipedia instead.

The only place a modern reader is apt to confront this word is during the introduction to the Antithesis of the Law in the Gospel of Matthew (5:18): “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled” (NKJV). The quotation uses them as an example of extremely minor details. The phrase “jot and tittle” indicates that every small detail has received attention.

So what Moore meant by “per jot and tittle” is that ordinances should be followed in every small detail.

Evidently, now that he is mayor, Dave doesn’t see it that way anymore, since he hasn’t felt obligated like any other person to obtain permits to build a fence and close a street.  

But hey, so what? Silt’s a small town. We’re all just friends and neighbors. We don’t need no stinkin permits, right?

And not only that, Moore is fond of saying these are all just “trivial, minor infractions”. (Be sure to click through to The Daily Sentinel article, it’s about me and my blog and how The Mayor and the reporter don’t actually read it.)

Go ahead. Put up a fence. Don’t bother with a permit or a survey. It doesn’t matter if part of it’s on the neighbor’s property. Who cares?

Now go dump a truckload of dirt in the street in front of your house. Close the street so the public and emergency vehicles don’t have the right of way. Maybe you can even coerce Public Works into loaning you a nifty sign like Mayor Moore did.

Hey, Mayor Moore does it and gets away with it. So far he hasn’t been cited.

Does this mean if we live in Silt we get to make up our own damn rules?

Click here to add From the Styx to your RSS reader.