BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2613
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 5, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 2613 (Beall) - As Amended: April 27, 2010
SUBJECT : Local government: fines and penalties: assessments.
SUMMARY : Authorizes a city or county after notice and public
hearing to specially assess and record a lien for any fines or
penalties resulting from an ordinance violation on the real
property that the fines or penalties are being assessed or
recorded on if the owner of the real property fails to pay those
fines or penalties after demand by the city or county.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes a city or county after notice and public hearing to
specially assess and record a lien for any fines or penalties
resulting from an ordinance violation on the real property
that the fines or penalties are being assessed or recorded on
if the owner of the real property fails to pay those fines or
penalties after demand by the city or county.
2)Provides the assessment imposed by a city or county may be
collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary
county taxes are collected.
3)Requires the assessment imposed by a city or county be subject
to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in case
of delinquency as are provided for ordinary county taxes.
4)Requires the special assessment to not result in a lien
against the real property but instead to be transferred to the
unsecured roll for collection when a city or county specially
assesses a real property and does not record a notice of lien
prior to a date on which the first installment of county taxes
would become delinquent and the real property has been
transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser of value or a
lien on a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created
and attaches to that real property.
5)Authorizes a city or county through an ordinance to combine
the administrative procedures adopted for the imposition,
enforcement, collection, and administrative review for
administrative fines or penalties related to the violation of
AB 2613
Page 2
any ordinance with nuisance abatement procedures that are
adopted through ordinance.
6)Authorizes a city, county, school district, municipal
corporation, district, political subdivision, or any board,
commission, or agency thereof, or other local public agency to
appoint one or more hearing officers to hear and decide issues
regarding ordinance violations and the imposition of fines and
penalties.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Permits the legislative body of a city, county, school
district, municipal corporation, district, political
subdivision, or any board, commission, or agency thereof, or
other local public agency to make any violation of any
ordinance enacted by the legislative body subject to an
administrative fine or penalty.
2)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.
3)Allows a county board of supervisors to delegate its powers
and duties to establish a nuisance abatement procedure to a
hearing officer pursuant to statutory provisions governing
hearing officers.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)SB 814 (Alquist, Kopp), Chapter 898, Statutes of 1995, which
added Government Code Section 53069.4, was intended to
facilitate the implementation of the Administrative Citation
Ordinance as an efficient code enforcement methodology that
would avoid the necessity of a criminal prosecution.
Specifically, Section 53069.4 was written to allow
administrative citations to closely mirror the parking
citation program. Subsequent amendments to that code section
dealt with accommodating changes in the municipal and superior
courts.
Under existing law, cities and counties are authorized to
AB 2613
Page 3
establish by ordinance a procedure to collect nuisance
abatement costs and related administrative costs by a nuisance
abatement lien or a special assessment. At one point, there
was a concern that special assessments for the purpose of
collecting the costs of nuisance abatement were too slow a
process for cities and counties and were frustrating for
private lenders. Alternatively, abatement liens were seen as
a viable way to speed up cost recovery and relieve lenders'
worries because, unlike special assessments, which are
"superliens" and jump to the front of the line when collection
comes due, abatement liens assume a sequential priority with
respect to other financial claims against the real property.
2)According to the author, AB 2613 is intended to allow local
governments to make their code enforcement processes more
efficient and effective by authorizing them to make unpaid
fine and penalties for property-related code violations by a
special assessment against the property, allowing them to
streamline their code enforcement processes by combining their
fine and penalties and nuisance abatement processes. AB 2613
also will allow for a more streamlined process for hearing
officers for these administrative procedures. The author says
existing law allows counties to use hearing officers, but
imposes certain procedural and substantive requirements that
make the use of hearing officers more onerous and expensive.
3)AB 2317 (Saldana), a similar bill, authorizes cities and
counties to collect fines related to nuisance abatement using
a nuisance abatement lien or a special assessment. AB 2317
passed out of this Committee on April 14, 2010, with a 6-2
vote.
4)Support Arguments : Supporters, County of Santa Clara, say,
unfortunately, not all property owners are responsive to
notices that the condition of their property endangers public
safety or is a public nuisance. By allowing local agencies to
make unpaid fines and penalties a special assessment against
the property, local agencies would have an alternative to
expensive and time-consuming civil litigation. Also being
able to use hearing officers to administer these processes
will streamline code enforcement activities.
Opposition Arguments : Opposition, Cal-Tax, says liens are a
powerful tool that should only be used in the most limited
circumstances. Expanding the liabilities for which a lien may
AB 2613
Page 4
be imposed to fines could incentivize local governments to
increase fines and set a precedent for further expanding
special assessments and liens. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association argues elected officials should have the final say
on fines collected by a municipality and should not be allowed
to delegate this authority to county hearing officers.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of Santa Clara [SPONSOR]
CA State Association of Counties
Opposition
Cal-Tax
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958