BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2317|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2317
Author: Saldana (D)
Amended: 8/20/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE : 3-1, 6/16/10
AYES: Kehoe, DeSaulnier, Price
NOES: Aanestad
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cox
SENATE FLOOR : 20-14, 8/18/10 (FAIL)
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Cedillo, DeSaulnier, Ducheny,
Florez, Hancock, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, Lowenthal, Padilla,
Pavley, Price, Romero, Simitian, Steinberg, Wolk, Wright,
Yee
NOES: Aanestad, Ashburn, Cogdill, Correa, Denham, Dutton,
Emmerson, Harman, Hollingsworth, Huff, Negrete McLeod,
Runner, Strickland, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Corbett, Oropeza, Walters, Wiggins,
Vacancy, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 47-24, 5/17/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Local government: nuisance abatement
SOURCE : City of San Marcos
DIGEST : This bill authorizes cities and counties to
collect fines related to nuisance abatement using a
nuisance abatement lien or a special assessment.
CONTINUED
AB 2317
Page
2
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/20/10 add a sunset date of
January 1, 2014.
ANALYSIS : Existing law permits cities and counties to
establish by ordinance a procedure to collect nuisance
abatement costs and related administrative costs by a
nuisance abatement lien or a special assessment.
State law defines a nuisance as anything that is injurious
to health, indecent or offensive to the senses, obstructs
the free use of property, or unlawfully obstructs free
passage. In addition to civil and criminal enforcement
mechanisms, counties and cities can adopt ordinances that
establish local procedures for abating nuisances (AB 2593
[Veysey], Chapter 1941, Statutes of 1965). Counties and
cities can recover abatement costs, including
administrative costs, by using a special assessment,
abatement lien, or both.
This bill authorizes a county board of supervisors to
assess fines related to nuisance abatement against a parcel
if the parcel owner fails to pay the costs of abatement
upon demand by the county.
This bill authorizes a city council to establish a
procedure to collect abatement related fines by a nuisance
abatement lien.
This bill authorizes a city council to include fines in the
cost of abatement that the council can specially assess
against the parcel of land on which the nuisance is
maintained.
The provisions of this bill sunset on January 1, 2014.
Background
Counties' nuisance abatement procedures . A county
ordinance establishing administrative procedures for
nuisance abatement must require that the owner of the
parcel, and anyone known to be in possession of the parcel,
receive notice of the abatement proceeding and have a
hearing before the board of supervisors before the county
CONTINUED
AB 2317
Page
3
can abate the nuisance. The county supervisors can
delegate the hearing to a hearing board or hearing officer.
A county may summarily abate a nuisance that a board of
supervisors or county officer determine constitute an
immediate threat to public health or safety.
If the owner fails to pay the county's abatement costs, the
board of supervisors can order the abatement cost to be
specially assessed against the parcel. The assessment can
be collected on the property tax bill, subject to the same
penalties, procedure, and sale in case of delinquency as
are provided for ordinary county taxes. All laws regarding
the levy, collection, and enforcement of county taxes apply
to the special assessment.
If a county specially assesses abatement costs against a
parcel, it can also record a notice of abatement lien,
which has the same effect as recordation of an abstract of
a money judgment and has the same priority as a judgment
lien. If no abatement lien is recorded and the real
property on which an assessment is imposed is sold, or
becomes foreclosed, before the first installment of the
taxes becomes delinquent, then the assessment transfers to
the unsecured tax roll for collection.
Cities' nuisance abatement procedures . A city ordinance
establishing a procedure for nuisance abatement and making
the cost of abatement of a nuisance upon a parcel of land a
special assessment against that parcel must include notice,
by certified mail, to the property owner. The notice must
be given at the time of imposing the assessment and must
specify that the property may be sold after three years by
the tax collector for unpaid delinquent assessments. The
tax collector's power of sale is not affected by the
failure of the property owner to receive notice. The
assessment can be collected on the property tax bill,
subject to the same penalties, procedure, and sale in case
of delinquency as provided for ordinary municipal taxes.
All laws regarding the levy, collection and enforcement of
municipal taxes apply to the special assessment. However,
if the real property is sold, or becomes foreclosed, before
the first installment of the taxes becomes delinquent, then
the cost of abatement transfers to the unsecured tax roll
for collection.
CONTINUED
AB 2317
Page
4
Alternatively, a city can, by ordinance, establish a
procedure to collect abatement costs, including
administrative costs, by a nuisance abatement lien. The
ordinance must require that the owner of the parcel on
which the nuisance is maintained receive notice prior to
recordation of the abatement lien. If the owner cannot be
served with the notice, it can be posted on the property
and published in a newspaper. A nuisance abatement lien
must be recorded with the county recorder and has the
force, effect, and priority of a judgment lien. The lien
may be foreclosed by an action brought by the city for a
money judgment.
Local administrative fines and penalties . As an
alternative to civil and criminal enforcement mechanisms, a
local agency's legislative body can make any violation of
any of its ordinances subject to an administrative fine or
penalty (SB 814 [Alquist], Chapter 898, Statutes of 1995).
The local agency must adopt an ordinance specifying the
administrative procedures that govern the imposition,
enforcement, collection, and administrative review of the
fines or penalties. The administrative procedures must
grant a reasonable time to remedy a continuing violation
before the imposition of administrative fines or penalties,
when the violation pertains to building, plumbing,
electrical, or other similar structural and zoning issues
that do not create an immediate danger to health or safety.
Within 20 days after service of a final administrative
order or decision regarding administrative fines or
penalties, a person contesting that final administrative
order or decision may appeal in Superior Court. Local
agencies must go through a civil court proceeding to
collect unpaid fines and penalties.
To strengthen local code enforcement authority and avoid
the expense of civil litigation, city and county officials
want to collect unpaid fines related to nuisance abatement
using the same powers that they already use to collect
unpaid nuisance abatement costs.
Related Legislation
AB 2613 (Beall), 2009-10 Session, authorizes a city,
CONTINUED
AB 2317
Page
5
county, or city and county to use special assessments and
nuisance abatement liens to collect unpaid fines related to
ordinance violations on real property.
SB 1427 (Price), 2009-10 Session, requires local
governments to provide notice and an opportunity to correct
violations before levying a fine or penalty on a property
owner for failure to maintain a vacant foreclosed property.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/20/10)
City of San Marcos (source)
California State Association of Counties
City of Murrieta
City of Sacramento
County of Sacramento Board of Supervisors
League of California Cities
Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/17/10)
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Galgiani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez,
Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, John A. Perez
NOES: Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee,
Conway, Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher, Fuller, Gaines,
Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Knight, Logue, Miller, Nestande,
Niello, Nielsen, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Caballero, Furutani, Garrick,
Jeffries, Norby, Silva, Yamada, Vacancy
CONTINUED
AB 2317
Page
6
AGB:mw 8/23/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED