|1)||to eliminate nuisance locations through the implementation of available remedies, including: encouraging voluntary compliance from owners; filing criminal complaints for non-compliance with Building and Safety orders or Zoning conditions; imposing conditions or revoking conditional use permits through the Zoning Administrator; filing narcotics abatement and/or red light abatement lawsuits; preparing asset forfeiture lawsuits; and demolishing vacant buildings declared public nuisances by the Board of Building and Safety Commissioners;|
|2)||to establish integrated networks of law enforcement and governmental agencies, community-based organizations and concerned citizens;|
|3)||to provide neighborhood crime prevention and education programs to residents and businesses in targeted areas; and,|
|4)||to foster community coalitions among property owners, tenants, residents and business owners.|
Please refer to the complete article here: http://www.lacp.org/2003-Articles-Main/CNAPprogram.html
For further information from the County, here is another link to check out: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/bsd/prcesec/index.cfm
Back on March 2, 2000, L.A. Times printed the following article about N.A.T.:
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/mar/12/local/me-8189. 11 years later, it is rather disconcerting to observe that things seem to be getting worse rather than better.
The concept of having a department that oversees neighborhood compliance makes sense on paper. The problem develops when the officials who enforce such regulations become brutish in their tactics. Unless there is a clear reason for concern for safety, it seems, many times, that their intimidating approach is unnecessary.
Sure, everyone is expected to comply with governed county codes but geez do you have to scare the living daylights out of people? Please review some of the on-going complaints by actual L.A. County residents: