Code enforcement plays a key role
It appears our county commissioners will vote Tuesday to abolish our current Code Enforcement Department and merge it with building inspectors. I have dealt with Code Enforcement several times in the past 25 years as a resident and if they are separated, I dread what will happen to our community.
The department has already lost officers! The department handles so many more violations then watering and with only four officers currently working. The Building Department already has its hands full and I can't imagine it taking on the case load that Code Enforcement handles. Our community will suffer if this happens.
David Hutchins, Spring Hill
Commissioner too quick to tax
Once again Commissioner John Druzbick shows his true political view points. This is the second time that he has been in favor of taxing the citizens of Hernando County. Is this gentleman a closet Democrat?
Mr. Druzbick said that there are no more rocks to turn over to alleviate the county's $6 million budget shortfall. He therefore wants to raise our millage. The shortfall represents roughly 6 percent of the proposed 2013 general fund budget of close to $100 million. I suggest that the commissioners review the budget with a fine tooth comb and challenge every proposed cost submitted by their employees.
Just don't rely on what the department heads and the county administrator tell the board. If adamant for a tax increase, let the citizens vote on it in November.
The thing that really upsets me though was the board eliminating the impact fees on the home builders so that they could sell their houses cheaper. These fees were to cover infrastructure. These costs will now be borne by the citizens of the county. It is a tax on the citizens that shows where Druzbick and the board stands with respect to the home builders versus the citizens.
John J. Davis, Brooksville
Notice points out red light problems
On June 9, I received in the mail at my home in Spring Hill a notice of violation from the Brooksville Red Light Traffic Enforcement Program. The notice accuses me of running a red light at the intersection of Broad Street and Wiscon Road on June 3. It also showed a photo of a small compact vehicle making a right turn against a red traffic light signal.
The problem is that on that date and time I was working in Lakeland and was nowhere close to Brooksville. The photo taken of the vehicle, and the description and tag number does not pertain to any of my vehicles. However, I did recognized the vehicle as belonging to a friend of mine that resides in Brooksville. In 2005 I co-signed on the loan so that the Credit Union would approve it. She paid off the loan on the vehicle at the end of last year.
I called my friend and explained what I had received in the mail. She went on the Web site to view the infraction as it occurred. She informed me that it was her vehicle in the photo and it happened as she slowed down and made a right turn onto Wiscon Road. We couldn't understand why the notice was sent to me, so I looked up Florida Statute 316.075 that regulates the traffic in Florida.
As per this statute, in a joint owner situation, as was presumed to be by the issuing officer, the notification should have been mailed to the owner whose name appears first on the vehicle registration. Both registration and application for vehicle title has my friend's name appearing first, as it is clearly stated in the law. The notice should have been sent to my friend and at her address within 30 days after the violation.
This law also clearly states a notice of violation and a traffic citation may not be issued for failure to stop at a red light if the driver is making a right-hand turn in a careful and prudent manner as such was the case here.
Compliance of the law did not occur as the instructions set forth were not followed by the issuing authorities. The provisions were ignored.
Robert Rodriguez, Spring Hill
Obeying the law eliminates issue
I don't quite understand what all of the issues are with having cameras at intersections in Brooksville or any other local government or state for that matter.
Running a red light is illegal and is punishable by receiving a ticket and paying a fine. Why do drivers and others insist that signs be posted when an intersection has cameras installed?
When an officer is in the vicinity of an intersection, he or she has the right to issue a ticket for a driver who runs a red light. Do we expect signs to be posted 500 feet before an intersection warning drivers that an office is present and you can and will get a ticket if you run the light?
As far as the money that is collected from the tickets, I don't know of any company that will install these cameras for free, so it's only right that they get a portion of this revenue. It is up to the city to decide how its portion of the money is spent. Hopefully it will be spent so that all residents will benefit.
Josephine Lewis, Spring Hill