BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 129
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 129 (Beall)
As Introduced January 11, 2011
Majority vote
LOCAL GOVERNMENT 6-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Alejo, Bradford, Campos, | | |
| |Davis, Gordon, Hueso | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Smyth, Knight, Norby | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Authorizes a city or county after notice and public
hearing to specially assess and record a notice of lien for any
fines or penalties related to ordinance violations constituting
a public nuisance or threat to public health and safety 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 notice of lien for any fines or
penalties related to ordinance violations constituting a
public nuisance or threat to public health and safety 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)Authorizes the assessment imposed by a city or county to be
collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary
county taxes are collected, and requires all laws applicable
to the levy, collection, and enforcement of county taxes be
applicable to the assessment.
3)Provides the assessment does not constitute an assessment
lien, and does not constitute a lien on real property until a
notice of lien is recorded, pursuant to these provisions.
4)Requires the notice of lien to, at a minimum, do all of the
AB 129
Page 2
following:
a) Identify the assessor's parcel number and record owner;
b) Set forth the last known address of the record owner;
c) Set forth the date on which the assessment was ordered
by the city or county; and,
d) The amount of the lien.
5)Provides the recordation of a notice of lien has the same
effect as recordation of an abstract of a money judgment, as
recorded according to provisions in the California Code of
Civil Procedure.
6)Provides the lien created has the same force, effect, and
priority as a judgment lien on real property, and, upon order
of the city, county, or any officer authorized by the city or
county to act on its behalf, the lien may be released or
subordinated in the same manner as a judgment lien on real
property may be released or subordinated.
7)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
any ordinance with nuisance abatement procedures that are
adopted through ordinance.
8)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.
AB 129
Page 3
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 : SB 814 (Alquist and 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, Government Code 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
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.
According to the author, this bill 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
AB 129
Page 4
penalties and nuisance abatement processes. This bill 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.
AB 2613 (Beall) of 2010 contained identical provisions. The
Assembly Local Government Committee passed AB 2613 on a 6-3
vote. The Governor vetoed AB 2613, saying:
"It is important that the due process rights of homeowners are
balanced against a local government's right to collect an
ordinance violation fine. The current system that requires a
local government to seek judicial approval to impose a lien
properly balances these opposing interests."
AB 2317 (Saldana) of 2010 contained similar provisions by
authorizing cities and counties to collect fines related to
nuisance abatement using a nuisance abatement lien or a special
assessment. The Assembly Local Government Committee passed AB
2317 on a 6-2 vote. AB 2317 was vetoed by the Governor with a
message similar to AB 2613.
Support arguments: Supporters, County of Santa Clara, say,
allowing local agencies to use hearing officers and combine
their administrative fine/penalty and nuisance abatement
processes, streamlines code enforcement procedures. Also,
chronic and unresolved code enforcement situations could be
addressed quickly and efficiently under this bill.
Opposition arguments: Opposition, California Taxpayers
Association, say liens are a powerful tool that should only be
used in the most limited circumstances. Expanding the
liabilities for which a lien may be imposed to fines could
incentivize local governments to increase fines and set a
precedent for further expanding special assessments and liens.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer Klein Baldwin / L. GOV. /
(916) 319-3958
FN: 0000215
AB 129
Page 5