BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 129|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 129
Author: Beall (D)
Amended: 8/16/11 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 6-3, 6/22/11
AYES: Wolk, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Liu
NOES: Huff, Fuller, La Malfa
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 46-17, 4/14/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Local government: fines and penalties:
assessments
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill, until January 1, 2020, authorizes a
city, county, or city and county, after notice and public
hearing, to order unpaid fines or penalties to be specially
assessed against a parcel if the fines or penalties are
related to ordinance violations on the real property that
constitute a threat to public health and safety.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/16/11 delete the reference to
"public nuisance," require that a hearing notice must be
sent to a property owner at least 15 days before a hearing
and add a sunset clause.
ANALYSIS : Existing law allows counties and cities to
adopt ordinances that establish local procedures for
CONTINUED
AB 129
Page
2
abating nuisances. A local agency's legislative body can
make any violation of any of its ordinances subject to an
administrative fine or penalty.
This bill authorizes a city, county, or city and county,
after notice and public hearing, to order unpaid fines or
penalties to be specially assessed against a parcel if the
fines or penalties are related to ordinance violations on
the real property that constitute a threat to public health
and safety.
This bill requires a city, county, or city and county to
mail or deliver a hearing notice to the owner of a parcel
at least 15 days before a hearing to consider specially
assessing fines and penalties against the parcel. For the
purpose of this notice, this bill requires ownership of the
parcel to be determined by the latest assessment roll, the
records of the county assessor, or the records of the tax
collector, whichever is most recent.
This bill allows the assessment to be collected at the same
time and in the same manner as ordinary county taxes and
subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and
sale in case of delinquency. This bill declares that all
laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of
county taxes apply to the special assessment, except the
assessment does not constitute an assessment lien pursuant
to specified statutes governing special assessment liens'
priority. This bill also specifies that the assessment
does not constitute a lien on the real property until a
notice of lien is recorded.
If a city, county, or city and county specially assess the
cost of the administrative fines or penalties against the
parcel, this bill authorizes it to record a notice of lien
to perfect the lien. The abatement lien notice must:
Identify the assessor's parcel number.
Identify the record owner.
Set forth the last known address of the record owner.
Set forth the date upon which assessment was ordered by
the city, county, or city and county.
State the amount of the lien.
CONTINUED
AB 129
Page
3
This bill declares that recordation of a notice of lien has
the same effect as recordation of an abstract of a money
judgment. The lien against the parcel has the same force,
effect, and priority as a judgment lien on real property.
This bill allows the city, county, or city and county, or
any authorized officer to release or subordinate an
abatement lien in the same manner as releasing or
subordinating a judgment lien on real property.
This bill authorizes a city, county, or city and county to
combine the administrative procedures that govern the
imposition, enforcement, collection, and administrative
review of administrative fines and penalties with specified
nuisance abatement procedures.
This bill allows a local agency, in administrative
procedures, to authorize the appointment of hearing
officers to hear and decide issues regarding ordinance
violations and the imposition of administrative fines or
penalties.
This bill declares that the power it gives to the
legislative body of a city, county, or city and county is
in addition to any other powers of a city, county, or city
and county under its charter or any other legal authority.
This bill sunsets on January 1, 2020.
Comments
The recent recession has increased public nuisances in many
cities and counties while forcing local officials to cut
their enforcement budgets. Local governments have fewer
resources to enforce codes and standards. Some
recalcitrant property owners maintain nuisances on their
properties while ignoring administrative fines. These
fines accumulate into large debts, which are costly for
local officials to recover through the courts. Using
special assessment and abatement liens gives local
officials a less expensive and more effective method for
collecting unpaid fines and will provide a stronger
incentive for property owners to comply with local
ordinances. This bill helps local agencies protect the
public's health and safety by giving them stronger code
CONTINUED
AB 129
Page
4
enforcement authority that mirrors the authority they
already use to collect nuisance abatement costs.
Prior legislation
AB 2613 (Beall), of 2010, was nearly identical to this
bill, AB 2613 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, in his
vetoed message the Governor stated, "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."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/17/11)
California Association of County Treasurers and Tax
Collectors
California State Association of Counties
City of Camarillo
City of San Marcos
City of Torrance
County of Santa Clara
League of California Cities
Sierra Club California
Sonoma County Board of Supervisors
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/17/11)
California Taxpayers Association
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon,
Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Gatto, Gordon, Hall,
Hayashi, Roger Hern�ndez, Hill, Hueso, Huffman, Lara,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Perea, V.
Manuel P�rez, Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torres, Wieckowski, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Cook, Donnelly, Fletcher,
CONTINUED
AB 129
Page
5
Hagman, Halderman, Huber, Jeffries, Mansoor, Miller,
Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth, Valadao
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alejo, Butler, Conway, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gorell, Grove, Harkey, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mendoza,
Morrell, Olsen, Wagner, Williams, Vacancy
AGB:do 8/17/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED