![[The Brazil Times nameplate]](http://www.thebraziltimes.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
Overcast ~ High: 72°F ~ Low: 62°F Monday, May 21, 2012 |
|
Burn Permit Changes: Needful Change or Government Stepping into the Back Yard?Posted Friday, July 17, 2009, at 11:33 AM
Why is the City of Brazil contemplating changing its procedure for informing authorities that a citizen is going to roast a wiener in his backyard or charging the citizen what is basically a user fee to use his own property as he sees fit within the law?
My concern is the changes suggested or implemented to the procedure for obtaining permission to have a controlled fire on private property that conforms to Title IX, Chapter 90, § 90.42 (RECREATIONAL OR CEREMONIAL FIRES) as it was reported that a motion was accepted by the Common Council to do so on July 15 by The Brazil Times so as to require identification of the person signing the "burn permit" list and, perhaps at a later date, a fee. I have to question the change. What does it matter who lists the intent to burn a fire at a specific location for a fire that is within the scope of the ordinance? While I have signed for a "burn permit" in the past, I have also sent relatives to do so when I was otherwise occupied. Some of those persons reside elsewhere. How would a member of church group show residency at the church to comply with the change in procedure? Just how could the City of Brazil confirm that the person signing is, in fact, even a member of the church? That there is notification that there is a controlled fire is beneficial as there is no need for a response by the fire department; however, who made the notification is not relevant in the least and even the notifications that have been documented in the past have been used infrequently if at all. What conditions have occurred that warrant such a change in the procedure? For over five years, I have monitored the dispatch frequency of our local police and fire departments and I have never heard anyone dispatched to investigate a fire, with or without "burn permit", within the city limits nor have I heard of any investigation of a fire on the complaint of a neighbor. Admittedly, I do not monitor my scanner around the clock, so I will ask the question of how many fires have been investigated within the past three to five years. Of the several fires that I have burned in my back yard, none have been checked by city authorities even though several police officers have waved at us from Pinckley Street as we sat around the fire. As the procedure was prior to the acceptance of Councilman Lamb's motion, the administrative cost of regulating the "burn permit" list was limited to the cost of printing the signature sheet. No action was required on the part of any city employee other than making sure that forms were available unless the list needed to be checked to determine if a fire needed to be investigated. With the implementation of the requirement to check the documented identification of the signatory, the changed procedure requires that a city employee participate in the procedure and that costs money. I am going to overestimate the costs involved to attempt to determine the amount needed to defray the costs of regulating this procedure. For a ream of paper (500 sheets) on which to print 500 forms on which are printed 10 signatory lines, a high estimate of $5 is assigned. More than ten lines are on the current form that is being used. For copying or printing, I'll allow the standard retail rate for copying of $10 per copy. That yields a current cost of documentation of $5. for 5,000 "burn permits". With the implementation of the requirement to check identification, let us say that that procedure and the collection of a fee takes two (2) minutes of an employee's time. A fee of a dollar per burn permit under the overestimated scenario I have outlined would generate $5000 dollars, $55 for printing costs and $4,945 to cover employee time for 5,000 permits. At 30 permits per hour, to break even at a fee rate of $1 per permit an employee would have to be making $29.67 per hour which I really doubt. I have to ask what the plan would be to spend the excess and do we actually want to add the collection of "burn permit" fees to a city employee's tasks to provide a solution to what appears not to even be a problem of any consequence. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Hot topics Every Day's a Holiday - Data, Scope, and Perspective(0 ~ 7:15 AM, Sep 22)
On People, Permanence, and the Almost Perpetual Nature of a School Corporation
'PORK' and the Fallacy of Community Schools in Indiana in 2010
Professionals, Experts, the Common Man and Government Decisions
Musical Chairs, What a Game!
|
Email link
Read comments (14)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.thebraziltimes.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
Leo! Give it up. It has nothing to do with anything sensible. Somebody just thought that fire is dangerous and the average citizen just is not responsible enough to do it without a burn permit. Uh, oh, wait, that wouldn't really enhance safety, would it? Hmmm. Well, FIRE IS DANGEROUS! AND DANGEROUS, uh, *THINGS* NEED PERMITS! Get with it, Man!
Is there any revenue attached to the permit?
I think it's time to change.... $5.00 per permit to burn. People abuse the current system. Who cares where the money goes, it will go into a fund. No one has to be paid to "work" and take money for the permits, that is what the police dispatch is for. They already do for certain things anyway.
I look at it a little differently...The world is more populated now and to take care of it we need to do things so it can remain healthy. IF enforcement of a burn permit rule [with both decent fee and fine if bypassed] helps to reduce the number of backyard fires, it will have done its job by reducing sources of pollution.
It may not seem to be a big issue in town, but out in county you can still drive by black billowing smoke and see old tires burning and who knows what else. Even those charcoal fueled grills are sources of pollution and many have switched to cleaner burning propane. Some municipalities have become too populated for even fireplaces and woodstoves due to density of houses and urban pollution levels.
There's nothing like going out your back door and being hit with the smell of burning plastics etc from a neighbor burning their trash, whether in burn barrel or fireplace.
Don't they realize that it's just the same pollution that is now just trashing our atmosphere instead of his trash can?
This county got into this state of affairs by not charging a landfill fee that truly reflected the cost of having it and too many came from too far to use it up too quickly, but that is the way it seems to work around here. Only think about today and not tomorrow.
The more people that are affected by what others do around them, the more regulations are going to be put in place in order to protect us from having to find another place to live...From what I see, the earth is the only option right now for all of us. If we don't start protecting it, it won't just be that landfill is full of trash and no longer usable. It will be the earth iss too full of trash and no longer usable....
Rider -- LOL, since dangerous things need permits, sometimes I think we need to quit giving politicians permission to make decisions for us and to stick their hands in our wallets while doing it....LOL!
ConservativeDad -- As it stands at the moment, no revenue is attached nor was any needed to cover the costs of the former procedure except for the cost of printing the forms. With the addition of checking ID, the city would incur costs for the time it takes for an employee to do so.
Crimonology08 -- Who abuses the current system and why aren't they fined? Why should the procedure be changed if the city has failed to enforce the statute and collect fines from the guilty? Why should I have to pay a user fee on property I own when people who violate the law go unpunished?
Your statement, "No one has to be paid to "work" and take money for the permits, that is what the police dispatch is for" is false. We pay the police dispatcher and adding the duties of verifying IDs and handling money for permits takes time of that employee from other duties. There is no such thing as a "free lunch"!
Jenny -- Going to the extreme of denying a person freedom to "protect the environment" from civilization is just a bit absurd, wouldn't you say? Man does not "need" to pollute to live on God's green Earth. Only "civilized" man pollutes. No other animal on the planet does. Man does not need to cook food, heat shelter, have lights for the night, or the myriad other things that we associate with civilization to survive for a time on earth, period!...........LOL!
I'll finish your last statement for you. "From what I see, the earth is the only option right now for all of us. If we don't start protecting it, it won't just be that landfill is full of trash and no longer usable. It will be the earth is too full of trash and no longer usable".... And the species of man will disappear, leaving God to do something different with the planet if He so desires!
But, we are talking of the freedom of a person to have a fire on his property in the United States of America that conforms to the law after having paid the taxes demanded by the City without having to pay a user fee for the privilege or having to go through more hassle than is necessary to let the city know that there is no need of a fire truck.
Your examples are illustrations of fires that are in violation of state law that should have been investigated by law enforcement and punished by the court system. They would not meet the specifications of a fire that is within the ordinance. The "rule of thumb" concerning the specifications for a "legal" fire is that if you wouldn't cook over it, don't burn it. Trash, building materials, plastics, and treated lumber are listed among the proscribed substances.
Does three or four people sitting around a fire, talking and cooking wieners and marshmallows for a couple of hours make as large of a carbon footprint as they would if they cooked on a kitchen range, burned the house lights, and had the radio on to replace the crackling of a wood fire. I don't know for sure, but I doubt it.
You did bring up one thing that I had not thought of. If I must get a burn permit for a wood fire in my back yard, why shouldn't a homeowner have to get one to burn the same materials in a fireplace or wood burning stove?.........LOL! If the city is going to step into my back yard, they may as well step into people's homes, too. Property is property!
E-mail inquiries on this to the Mayor and Councilman Lamb have not, to date, been answered.
Quoting from the Brazil Times story published after the meeting with constituents of Ward 1:
"(Resident) Barbara (Martin) also wanted verification that it is illegal to burn trash within the city, even with a fire pit.
"Fire rings are not for trash, and residents are supposed to get a burn permit, which are basically limited to barbeques and hot dog roasts," Deal responded. "When they sign up for a permit, they are also supposed to specify the time they expect to be cooking out."
Heffner suggested imposing stiffer fines for illegal burns, which is currently set at $250 for the first offense and $500 for the second.
Bradshaw agreed something needed to be done and the city has been looking into creating a fee to obtain a burn permit and is trying to set up a work session with Brazil City Fire Department Chief Jim Smith regarding all burn matters. "
The penalty for violations is already in place, what is lacking is enforcement! The "burn permit" is nothing more than advising the city that there is no reason to "roll out" the fire department's equipment. Why should a person be charged for signing a sheet of paper to save the city tax dollars?
Who has not reported these illegal burns or not followed up on the report?
Who is not enforcing the law, it is time to send that person to the unemployment line?
Here's a question that I have. I don't live in Brazil, but always a possibility that I could be invited to a cookout or weiner roast at a friend's house or family members'. What if you get said permit for your Saturday get-together, and it rains ALL day? It DOES happen, as many of us found out on July 4th. Is your fee refunded because you have had to reschedule? Do you have to get another permit for the next day, because it is nice and sunny, or is the previous permit good enough? Sounds like just another excuse to take people's money to me.
Good point, Wiseguy. As the procedure was, you would have to go to the police dept. and sign the list again just so the fire dept. would know that the fire was to be expected at your location on the date you actually had it.
E-mail response to my inquiries concerning the change of procedure of Councilman Steve Lamb:
Mr. Southworth,
First of all, let me comment on the motion I made during the July 14 meeting. I have gone downstairs to the police dispatch area and read the list of people who have signed for burn permits. I do not recall anyone in Brazil named Mickey Mouse, Daisy Duck or Who Cares. (These are the presentable names.) These are but a few of the names filled in on this request form. The need to register and show proof of residency is called "accountability". If you are planning a recreational or ceremonial cookout, it takes time. Put it in your agenda to make application yourself for your fire.
I do not now nor do I see in the future me voting to charge a fee for "Recreational or Ceremonial" fires. I do however see a limit on the number of times burn permits are allowed to one residence.
"How would a member of church group show residency at the church to comply with the change in procedure?" Simple: churches pay water bills. Show identification and a water bill receipt and you're good to go. It is my opinion that they would not be exempt for these new rules.
"What conditions have occurred that warrant such a change in the procedure? For over five years, I have monitored the dispatch frequency of our local police and fire departments and I have never heard anyone dispatched to investigate a fire, with or without "burn permit", within the city limits nor have I heard of any investigation of a fire on the complaint of a neighbor." From my experience, most of the calls from neighbors have come into dispatch through telephone calls. The fire department is contacted by police via phone or intercom. All police officers have cell phones. Cell phones are primarily used because a lot of criminals have police scanners. If a call goes "over the air" about suspected drug activity at a certain house, why broadcast it so the suspects can "flush" the evidence? At times, while on routine patrol a police officer will spot a fire or smell smoke in the area. This is cause for investigation. The law is the law. Most times people claim they have never heard of such an ordinance in Brazil, or "it's just a little fire".
"Of the several fires that I have burned in my back yard, none have been checked by city authorities even though several police officers have waved at us from Pinckley Street as we sat around the fire." How can you say "none have been checked"? On what possible fact do you base that statement?
"As the procedure was prior to the acceptance of Councilman Lamb's motion, the administrative cost of regulating the "burn permit" list was limited to the cost of printing the signature sheet." I'm not going to get into your cost analysis to issues permits. It is so inexpensive it's not worth mentioning here.
Respectfully,
Steve Lamb
Brazil City Council - Ward 3
Home Phone: 812/442-0745
Cell Phone: 812/229-0020
Questions and response to Councilman Lamb's comments:
How many "backyard" fires have been investigated in the last twelve months?
How many were reported through neighbors' complaints?
How many were investigated due to observation by proper authorities and what prompted the investigation?
How many citations have been written by city authorities for improper burning in the past twelve months?
How many "first offense" fines have been levied?
How many have been collected? How many "second or sub-sequential offense" fines have been levied and collected?
How many obviously fictitious persons have signed for burn permits in the last twelve months?
Were the occurrences investigated? Surely, if Daffy Duck is burning something, it should have been investigated at the earliest opportunity! Were the locations checked, even if the fire was out? Surely, Cartoonland is out of the jurisdiction of the Brazil Police Department and the response area of the Fire Department so the properties involved must be within the city limits.
Is there an ordinance in force that makes the use of a fictitious name an infraction in reporting that there will be a controlled fire within the city limits? Is it an infraction of State law?
How many citations have been sent to residences that fictitious people have listed on the list for burn permits in the last twelve months?
How many citations have been sent to the owners of property listed by fictitious people for burn permits in the last twelve months?
What financial burden has the city incurred that has not been recouped through the payment of fines during the last twelve months?
I'm going to address, now, some issues raised by Councilman Lamb's response to my e-mail.
"The need to register and show proof of residency is called "accountability"." ....................What matter is it who listed the location of a controlled fire as long as it stays under control? Wouldn't the resident, the owner, or persons on the scene be responsible if it got out of control?
"I do however see a limit on the number of times burn permits are allowed to one residence." ......................Why? Are you also going to limit the number of days that a person burns a fire in their fireplace or wood-burning stove?
"If you are planning a recreational or ceremonial cookout, it takes time. Put it in your agenda to make application yourself for your fire." ................Why? Just to conform to a notion that that is the way that it should be? Most of my backyard barbeques are impromptu affairs for my family and friends. Why should I have to stop my preparations to get a burn permit when someone would be going past City Hall on their way? These statements appear to mean that the citizen should kowtow to the wishes of city government far beyond the control of property to protect the public health, safety or welfare of its citizens as stated in Chapter 90, Section 90.01 of the city ordinances.
"How can you say "none have been checked"? On what possible fact do you base that statement?" I can make that statement as I have been present, as far as I know, whenever there has been a fire in my yard. There might have been one while I was on vacation, but no one has informed me of that happening. While a person may be able to observe that there is a fire burning in my yard, no one can confirm what is burning from the street. They would have to walk up to the fire to see if I were burning building materials such as treated boards.
""As the procedure was prior to the acceptance of Councilman Lamb's motion, the administrative cost of regulating the "burn permit" list was limited to the cost of printing the signature sheet." I'm not going to get into your cost analysis to issues permits. It is so inexpensive it's not worth mentioning here." ............I am sorry, but as a citizen, I feel that where every penny of public money comes from and where it goes to is extremely important to the citizen! That is called government accountability!
O.K. I understand having a permit so the fire dept. is aware that my son and I are making smores instead of burning down the garage and I'm cool with having to pay a small fee ($5 is too much especially during this time where the economy is crap) but what I don't understand is why would the city limit the amount of times I can sit around a fire. Money is tight for everyone and for some, like me, a fire is cheap enjoyment. Whether it's to cook a hot dog or create a peaceful environment for my family, friends and myself to enjoy each others company, as long as it is "within the law" what does it matter how many times I do that? I also agree that I should be able to ask my friend to run up and get a permit on his/her way because I have the whole neighborhood playing, laughing and enjoying their summer on my trampoline. As the homeowner, I will be responsible anyway should anything happen so who cares who signs for it? Am I wrong about the homeowner being responsible? People get sued all the time because someone got hurt on "their property" even if the person sueing was at fault.