yeah but the point is that they dont make a secret mark on the ticket for the DA to see. if anything they make the mark in their book and show up to court to tell the DA

2/28/2006 10:35:23 AM

on my last nuisance party ticket Officer Draughon wrote "polite/cooperative" on the back and told me that the DA would go easy on me since he did that.

GUESS WHAT.

I have to do ten hours of community service just like every other fucker that had a nuisance ticket that was in court that day...........


all of this shit about cops writing love letters on the ticket for the DA is horse dooky. i even asked that he dismiss it since it was my first offense and he basically said he had to have some kind of justification to do that such as a letter saying i did community service or something.

I did not make a thread or bitch about my ticket because honestly I had no ground to stand on. I can however understand why those of you who threw a weak party, or were just hanging out and got tickets and are pissed about it.

2/28/2006 12:09:51 PM

just be glad that pig bowen isnt still in charge of it (although these reports make it sound like he still is). we had a birthday party once, BYOB and the only people outside were smoking cigs, next thing i knew some asshole let bowen in and i didnt even get to argue shit, i was in cuffs before i knew it.

wrote us up for 5 kegs (all old and empty, sitting along the wall in our garage), 250 people (lol, not that time at least), littering (brent road was always trashed), DJ music (we had a DJ?), etc. those bitchboys can do whatever they want, basically. try out the PJC if you havent already. that way you dont have to get stuck with community service.

seriously though, my parents laughed when i called to tell them i got arrested for a birthday party.

2/28/2006 2:16:56 PM

What bowen did was paramount to harrassment. Thank god that state student ran for city council and they got rid of him around that time. It took some serious rallying and campaigning but some changes were made and for the longest time you did not hear of NPO tickets being issued.

Honestly the timing of this makes me wonder if it is not a backlash from the recent crime spree.

2/28/2006 4:25:19 PM

^^^

Quote :

"I can however understand why those of you who threw a weak party, or were just hanging out and got tickets and are pissed about it."

hahahaha i bet your party totally ruled!!!1 who are you trying to impress

2/28/2006 5:28:45 PM

?????? I think you are reading too much in to my post. The point I am trying to make is that they write NPO tickets for having like 5 people at your fucking house or for parties that hardly constitute a nuisance.

Stop fucking thread crapping. Your a moderator.

[Edited on February 28, 2006 at 5:34 PM. Reason : I LOVE THE COCK]

2/28/2006 5:33:26 PM

no, the point you are trying to make is that you didnt even contest yours cause you knew your party was totally badass!!1

2/28/2006 5:34:48 PM

in december i got the cops called on me for having a board game night with a few (8) friends... very little alcohol, no loud music... The RPD guy came and was like 'you guys go this call in, you need to break it up immediately' . I asked him why, since we werent doing anything illegal... he responded well, i guess you dont have to, i just think its a good idea. I told him we would continue as we were, since we were in no violations, and to have a good night.

point of story, they sometimes just want to push you around, but if youre in no violations they cant screw with you.


problem is its pretty easy to get a violation thesedays.

3/1/2006 10:53:32 AM

i met the lady who lives below me tonight, coolest old lady ever. She was like, I know you're going to have parties and be playing music, and I don't mind. Just as long as you're not jumping around on the floor over my bedroom, I'll be just fine.

I told her she could come party with us last night, but she declined.

3/1/2006 1:09:11 PM

Quote :

"try out the PJC if you havent already. that way you dont have to get stuck with community service. "

or you can just pay your fine and be done with it.

thats all i did, and its had absolutely zero impact on my life. its nothing more then a speeding ticket. i wouldnt even waste a PFJ on it...save that for a speeding ticket so your insurance doesnt go up.

3/2/2006 2:12:31 PM

My friends just party outside Raleigh city limits now, but we're lucky enough to know a few folks who have places good for parties and outside raleigh since we're only about 1/2 college students.

3/2/2006 2:22:47 PM

if you ever get this ordinance call james crouch, $300 he can take care of it for you. he got my citation dismissed. especially if you were polite with the officer.

3/16/2006 8:16:16 PM

^$300 is outrageous when all the do is say 10 hours of community service in exchange for dismissal of the charge

3/16/2006 8:32:11 PM

like $30 an hour is what you would be saving.

3/17/2006 12:05:32 AM

Draughton reads this. I would highly suggest not posting about your NPO, because it kind of irritates him.

He's not a bad guy, just has to do a shitty job.

3/17/2006 1:00:04 PM

why would that upset him?

3/17/2006 1:02:58 PM

Beats me. I heard this from a trusted source though.

3/17/2006 2:46:37 PM

i guess it would make too much sense just not to read the wolf web if it bothers him so much.

3/17/2006 2:48:42 PM

here is an excerpt from a raleigh city council meeting concerning the NPO and PROP ordinances. After reading through it, I can't help but think the entire city is against students!

LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

The Law and Public Safety Committee of the City of Raleigh met on Tuesday, March 14, 2006, at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Raleigh, Municipal Building, Avery C. Upchurch Government Complex, 222 W. Hargett Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, with the following present:

Committee Staff

Mr. Isley Attorney Dan McLawhorn
Mr. West Assistant City Manager Julian B. Prosser
Ms. Taliaferro Assistant City Manager Dan Howe
Inspections Director Larry Strickland
Lieutenant Moorman

Chairman Isley called the meeting to order and the following item was discussed with action taken as shown.

Item #03-30 – Public Nuisance Ordinance Review – Mr. Isley stated the Public Nuisance Ordinance review would be used to review the one year history of the PROP ordinance.

Assistant City Manager Prosser stated when City Council adopted the Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit ordinance it was agreed that in one year the status of this document would be reviewed.

Mr. Isley stated there may be individuals here who have had a PROP appeal referring to the following items:

Item #05-02 - PROP Appeal – 2320 Calvert Drive
Item #05-04 - PROP Appeal - 2311 Poole Road
Item #05-06 –PROP Appeal – 3901 A Jackson Street

He stated he would allow anyone present for these to make statements but would like for Assistant City Manager Howe to give a status on the Prop and allow citizens to give input on this matter but there would be no action today and the Committee would just like to review and obtain information from the audience and he does anticipate having at least one or two more meetings before giving recommendation to City Council. .

Assistant City Manager Howe – stated when Council approved the PROP last year they asked to receive an annual review of the ordinance to show any problems. He highlighted the following report:

Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit, 1 Year Annual Report, March 1, 2006,
For the period February 7, 2005 through February 1, 2006

This report is intended to provide information after one year of operation of the new Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit (PROP) ordinance, which was made effective in February, 2005.
The PROP ordinance was intended to be a tool that primarily affects rental business property owners whose rental property is the site of a violation of a series of “quality of life” regulations in the City Code, or a pattern of citations and mitigation, or a pattern of criminal convictions for noise and party ordinance violations. The theory behind the PROP ordinance is that it will not affect those whose rental property remains in compliance, it will place on probation those properties where transgressions have occurred, and it will ultimately remove the right to rent properties where a pattern of repeat violations appears unabated through the probationary period.
The enactment of this ordinance was one of a series of initiatives undertaken by the City Council after the presentation and discussion of the Neighborhood Preservation and Housing Task Force (NPHTF). This report is not intended to cover the whole scope of the NPHTF recommendations and City actions as a result of these recommendations. It will concentrate to the extent possible only on the PROP ordinance and its first year outcomes. This being said, it is difficult to divorce the influence of the new PROP ordinance from the effects of associated programs instituted by the Council in the last year, such as the dramatic increase in fees and fines for PROP-related violations, as well as increased awareness in the community, education efforts among rental property owner communities and a larger enforcement staff. There are inevitably cross-over effects in all these programs, and any conclusions presented in this report should be considered in this light
Has the PROP ordinance been effective?
If success of the program is measured by reductions in the number of actionable nuisance violations and abatements, the combination of additional enforcement personnel, increased fees and fines, and the enactment of the Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit have had a positive effect Overall public nuisance cases in 2005 have declined by approximately 18% over the year 2004. Public nuisance — vehicle cases have dropped by almost half, but interestingly the number of zoning violations for unlicensed vehicles has more than doubled in the same period. Overall the total number of these cases has declined by 389 cases over the prior year, about a 10% decline. How much of this effect is due to the increased administrative fees and fines and how much is attributable to the threat of a permit under the PROP ordinance is difficult to determine. Because the effect seems to be generally across the board, affecting even multi-family, commercial and apartment projects not subject in general to the PROP, a conclusion may be drawn that a substantial amount of this reduction may be attributable to the fee and fine increase, but because the PROP ordinance drew considerable publicity during its discussion, it is quite possible that an overall increased level of diligence on the part of professional property managers may have resulted from the ordinance itself.

3/17/2006 6:19:26 PM

Has the PROP Ordinance affected a large number of property owners?
A total of 8 Probationary Rental Occupancy Permits have been issued in the past 12-month period. 18 additional cases are pending.

Has the PROP ordinance been effective in reducing noise / party ordinance (criminal) violations?
With the advent of the PROP ordinance, detailed statistics of Noise and Party Ordinance (NPO) violations were collected throughout 2005 by the Raleigh Police Department and the City Inspections Department Housing and Environmental Division. Because information was not gathered on this violation type at the same level of detail in prior years, 2005 will become the baseline year, and more information on the effectiveness of the program will be available next year. Overall, over 860 NPO responses were made by the Raleigh Police Department city-wide in the past year related to noise or excessive party ordinance calls. By far the largest number of these (76.9%) occurred in District 26 (Southwest Raleigh). Of the 36 documented convictions, all were for nuisance party ordinance (Sec. 13-3017) violations except for 3 convictions for violations of the noise ordinance (Sec. 12-5007).
Because of the concentration of this problem in the area nearest North Carolina State University, Lt. Moorman of District 26 assigned a single officer to a concentrated CLAMPDOWN program intended to focus on this issue. In the period since the initiation of the CLAMPDOWN assignment in September, 2005:
Because these are violations of criminal statutes, any citation must proceed through full due process to a conviction in a court of law before b applicable to the PROP. Two such convictions in a 24-month period at the same address must occur before a PROP permit is required.
Officer Draughon has issued 252 citations for NPO violations, alcohol violations, and other noise
Of these 252 violations, 132 (52.3%) were on properties with less than 20 units (91 single family dwelling, up s, 11 apartment complexes with less than 20 units), 120 (47.7%) were in apartment complexes with more than 20 units.
214 of these incidences were NPO violations that could ultimately lead to a PROP permit requirement if 2 convictions are obtained at the same address. However, over 47% of violations were in apartment complexes of more than 20 units or on commercial properties which are not subject to the PROP unless specifically brought under the PROP regulations via Council action
NPO violations have also led to a number of other arrests, including several felony drug arrests that have occurred while D26 Officers were investigating NPO violations.
NPO violations are enforced equally, and although a large number of these violations are issued to students, other non-students have also been issued citations. There have been several individuals in their 30s and 40s that have been cited for NPC) violations.
Raleigh PD has maintained a good relationship with NCSU Public Safety and partners with them through the use of Campus Appearance Tickets and other coordinated efforts.
Have many candidates requested an appeal? How effective was this program?
13 notices of a pending PROP requirement were appealed to the Inspections Director. 6 of these were granted, 4 were denied and axe now pending City Council appeal review, and 3 were denied and have been issued Probationary Rental Occupancy Permits. Each time an appeal is brought before the Inspections Director, approximately 4 hours of the Directors time and an additional 2 horns of support staff time are required for documentation, review, hearing and disposition. For these 13 appeals, over I full week of the Directors time has been devoted to this activity this year. The outcome appears to be fair and even handed, but has the potential to be hugely burdensome to the Inspections Director as the number of potential PROP permits increases. It also causes the Inspections Director to be asked to apply considerable discretion in deciding the appeals, a role not typically delegated to administrative public employees. Increasing numbers of appeals are anticipated over the next year, particularly appeals related to the three strikes provision (see discussion below) and to the administrative fee provisions of the City Code (see discussion at the end of this report).
Has the PROP program caused a strain on administrative resources?
Approximately $10,000 has been spent relating to PROP and administrative fee data processing. The Inspections Department has dedicated another S30,000 for completion of programming associated with the PROP program by the end of this fiscal year.
One MultiTrade Housing Inspector has full time job responsibilities associated with the PROP program. The additional staff time devoted to the PROP program, including inspectors and administration is approximate to another full time position or around 2,000 hours in the past year. It is anticipated that this will likely increase as the number of permit holders grows and tracking of permit status at multiple addresses becomes a larger task. This increasing demand will be mitigated somewhat by the more robust field-based software that will be available to inspectors in this next year.
It should be noted that some of the apartment complexes work with the police department in an excellent manner and are very proactive at addressing the concerns about parties on their property. it is not unusual for a property that works with the police department to see an increase in violations on their property due to the fact that they are cooperative and do provide information. Some complexes hire off-duty police officers or private security to patrol their grounds. This may cause the property to have a higher number of NP0 violations than they would have otherwise experienced.

Has the word gotten out to the community about the how the PROP ordinance works and what its intent is?
Considerable outreach has taken place with organized groups in the community. At least 20 presentations have been made at groups ranging from the Raleigh Board of Realtors and the Triangle Apartment Association to the Trailwood Hills and Boylan Heights Homeowners Association. Over 4000 PROP flyers have been distributed to tenants and owners as part of enforcement actions. A Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit video announcement aired on Raleigh Television Network daily for 27 weeks in addition to local media coverage of the approval debate prior to the ordinance adoption. Web content related to PROP has been posted on http://www.raleighnc.gov in addition to the more traditional general press releases and utility bill inserts about the program.

3/17/2006 6:21:25 PM

there is a lot more to the document.....mostly concerning the PROP ordinance.....if anyone wants me to forward them the document....just let me know

3/17/2006 6:22:38 PM

Quote :

"Approximately $10,000 has been spent relating to PROP and administrative fee data processing."

3/17/2006 8:39:35 PM

^taxpayer money at its finest eh?

3/17/2006 9:42:51 PM

Quote :

"why would that upset him?"

Nobody likes having their dirty laundry aired. It might put him in danger of being accountable for his actions.

3/19/2006 9:15:39 AM

^^^^^ somebody sum all of that up

3/19/2006 12:34:03 PM

^long story short....RPD responded to 860 NPO calls in 2005....76.9 percent of which were in district 26 (the area surronding NC State). Because of the high number, the leutinant for district 26 started a "clampdown" campaign to specifically target parties. The "clampdown" officer is draughon.

This started in september of 2005. Draughon has since written 252 citations.

Also, it talks about how the RPD works with NC State police by giving out campus appearance tickets.

3/19/2006 1:20:52 PM

Of course the city is going to be against students. Students do not vote, and grumpy old people whose full time jobs are complaining about kids DO vote. Until you change that, or at least change the first part, how can you expect the city NOT to be against you?

3/20/2006 2:07:06 AM