HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8a. Study Session - Code Enforcement Update Item 8a
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4006
For Agenda of: 10/3/2023
Placement: Study Session
Estimated Time: 90 minutes
FROM: Timmi Tway, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Michael Loew, Deputy Director/Chief Building Official
John Mezzapesa, Code Enforcement Supervisor
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION: CODE ENFORCEMENT UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive a presentation on the current state of Code Enforcement; and
2. Provide comments and direction to staff.
POLICY CONTEXT
The Code Enforcement Division of the Community Development Department is charged
with promoting health and safety in neighborhoods and increasing awareness and
information about city policies and codes. Code enforcement staff investigates potential
building and zoning code violations a nd works with property owners to gain compliance
when a violation is identified. The Community Development Director is granted authority
to make decisions and interpretations regarding health and safety violations and
interpreting applications of the code in violations cited by Code Enforcement Officials
(SLOMC 1.24). This authority is often delegated to the Deputy Director/Chief Building
Official to carry out such relevant duties.
The Chief Building Official is granted authority to excise the powers authorized by Section
836.5(a) of the California Penal Code, which includes issuing citations for violations of the
provisions of the municipal code (Title 1.16.060). The Chief Building Official is also the
“code official” for the city and the “authority having jurisdiction,” as used in the City’s
adopted codes, in making determinations regarding compliance with those codes. (Title
15.04.010).
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) defines Code
Enforcement as “the prevention, detection, investigation, and enforcement of violations
of statutes or ordinances regulating public health, safety, and welfare, public works,
business activities and consumer protection, building standards, land -use, or municipal
affairs.” Recently, code enforcement related issues, especially those relating to safe
housing, have been raised by members of the community and Councilmembers during
City Council meetings.
Page 137 of 182
Item 8a
This report provides an overview of the role that Code Enforcement plays with in the City
of San Luis Obispo community, discusses the intersection of Code Enforcement and safe
housing, and requests feedback from the community and City Council.
Contents of Report:
Part 1: Introduction to Code Enforcement
1.1 History of Code Enforcement in the City of San Luis Obispo
1.2 Current State of Code Enforcement
1.3 Roles and Responsibilities
Part 2: “Into the Weeds”
2.1 Investigation Requests and Case Assignment
2.2 Current and Past workload
2.3 Administrative Citation Process
Part 3: Safe Housing
3.1 History of Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP)
3.2 Current approach to Safe Housing
Part 4: Council Focus Questions
Several acronyms are used throughout this report in reference to positions within the
division and other program related items. The following glossary helps to define these
acronyms:
CACEO California Association of Code Enforcement Officers
ZIC Zoning Investigations Coordinator
NSM Neighborhood Services Manager
CEC Code Enforcement Coordinator
CEO Code Enforcement Officer
NSS Neighborhood Services Specialist
CES Code Enforcement Supervisor
CEAA Code Enforcement Administrative Assistant
CET I Code Enforcement Technician I (synonymous with NSS)
CET II Code Enforcement Technician II (synonymous with Safe Housing Specialist)
NEO Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance
SCEO Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer
DISCUSSION
Part 1: Introduction to Code Enforcement
CACEO defines a Code Enforcement Officer as “a sworn or non -sworn inspector, officer
or investigator, employed by a city, or county, or city and county, who possesses
specialized training in, and whose primary duties are the prevention, detection,
investigation, and enforcement of violations of laws regulating public nuisance, public
health, safety, and welfare, public works, business activities, and consumer protection,
building standards, land-use, or municipal affairs." This broad definition outlines the
various duties that Code Enforcement Officers are tasked with across the state of
California.
Page 138 of 182
Item 8a
Code enforcement responsibilities are often divided amongst various specialized roles in
jurisdictions throughout the country, which may vary depending on the issues that are
common in each community. Examples of this include building inspectors enforcing “work
without permits” violations, rental inspectors enforcing “substandard housing” violations,
public works inspectors enforcing right-of-way encroachments, and environmental
compliance inspectors enforcing creek violations. In the City of San Luis Obisp o, code
enforcement officers are tasked with maintaining the health and safety of neighborhoods
in general and are also responsible for addressing specific types of violations that have
been identified as being of interest to the community. With the exception of the
Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer, the Code Enforcement team is made up of
generalists who have been assigned the responsibility of enforcing municipal code
violations, such as the ones listed above, with consultation from technical specialists
when necessary.
1.1 History of Code Enforcement in the City of San Luis Obispo
The organization, size, and duties of the Code Enforcement Division in the City of San
Luis Obispo have changed over the past several decades, as the needs and priorities of
the community have changed. Since 2015, over thirteen separate regulations and
ordinances have been enacted or assumed via Service Level Agreements, that have
elements which Code Enforcement staff is responsible for enforcing. Examples of
regulations adopted by ordinance that Code Enforcement staff enforce include:
Regulation of activities within creek and riparian areas
Smoking in certain areas
Offensive odors
Regulation of use of expanded polystyrene containers for prepared foods by fo od
provider
Regulation of single-use plastic water bottles on city property
Single-use straws
Enforcement of abandoned shopping carts
Review and approval of Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention and Retrieval
Plans
Cannabis regulations (Personal cultivation)
Regulation of cannabis establishments
Graffiti abatement
Additionally, the Community Development Department has entered into a Service Level
Agreement with Public Works to respond to and notify residents regarding tree/shrub
growth and basketball hoops or other encroachments in the public right of way.
Since 2016, following the implementation and repeal of the Rental Inspection program,
the Code Enforcement Division's organizational structure has changed several times to
fit the needs of the Building & Safety Division and Community Development Department.
Intermittent vacancies and the introduction of new regulations which require code
enforcement oversight for general compliance, required existing staff to fill gaps in
enforcement as they developed.
Page 139 of 182
Item 8a
Attachment A depicts a brief overview of the changes in staffing levels, job duties
assigned to code enforcement officers, and the population change of the City over a span
of 46 years. This attachment illustrates that, during this time, staffing has ranged from
one code enforcement staff member to a peak of eight staff members (each position is
represented by a circular graphic). The largest drop in the number of positions within
Code Enforcement occurred when the Rental Housing Inspection Program was repealed
in 2017. Currently, the team is comprised of six staff members, as described in more
detail in this report.
1.2 Current State of Code Enforcement
Currently, the City of San Luis Obispo has one Code Enforcement Supervisor overseeing
two Code Enforcement Officers, one Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer, and two
Code Enforcement Technicians. The team currently resides in the Community
Development Department, within the Building and Safety Division, and the Code
Enforcement Supervisor reports to the Chief Building Official. The current organization al
structure for the Code Enforcement team is included below as Figure 1.2.
The Code Enforcement Supervisor is tasked with developing and maintaining the
programs associated with the code enforcement division as well as providing the
necessary guidance, tools, and knowledge for the Code Enforcement Officers to
implement the programs. The supervisor plays a direct supervisory role to ensure
compliance with applicable regulations, procedures, and policies at the local level, as well
as at the state and national levels where adopted by the Municipal Code (e.g., Section
12.23.030 which makes violations of various state codes a violation of the City’s creek
regulations).
City of San Luis Obispo Code Enforcement Officers are non -sworn personnel who are
responsible for investigating reports of potential violations relating to regulation of
building, zoning, health & safety, neighborhood enhancement , and other miscellaneous
standards. Potential violations are reported to the City by community members, and all
reported violations are investigated (this process is explained in more detail in Part 2 of
this report). Code Enforcement Officers are often involved in complex situations involving
health, safety, and public nuisance in which they must navigate gaining compliance by
utilizing the lowest level of enforcement required. In an effort to provide fair and equitable
solutions, the personal and financial situations of property owners, business owners, and
residents can play a role in decision making. The navigation of these aspects requires
Code Enforcement Officers to have a high level of emotional intelligence, effective
communication, and conflict-resolution skills.
The Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer position was created in 2021 in response to
deficiencies noted in the City’s Stormwater inspection program related to active
construction sites. This position is currently a full-time contract position that was added to
the Building and Safety Division at the beginning of the FY21-23 financial plan. While this
duty was originally assigned to the Building Inspection team and primarily focused on
enforcing Best Management Practices (BMP) on active construction sites, the position is
now part of the Code Enforcement team so that the citation process can be utilized to
ensure compliance.
Page 140 of 182
Item 8a
Unlike Code Enforcement Officers, who focus on reported violations, Code Enforcement
Technicians proactively identify municipal code violations that can be seen from the public
right of way. These positions also provide timely responses to minor complaints, and all
reported abandoned shopping carts throughout the city. Additionally, the Code
Enforcement Technician II position focuses on developing and implementing a Safe
Housing Education and Outreach program. This position provides eviction prevention
education consistent with the 2021-23 and 2023-25 Homelessness Major City Goal. This
includes providing outreach to tenants and landlords and responding to all complaints
regarding rental properties. The CET II position is tasked with using enforcement methods
other than violation notices and citations, such as extended timelines for compliance,
providing educational material, offering more accessible paths to obtain correctiv e
building permits, and other methods to promote a cooperative approach with property
owners to gain compliance.
The size of Code Enforcement Divisions throughout the State of California varies from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Some studies have been done that calculate the average
number of code enforcement officers per resident within communities. In 2019, a study
conducted by the California County Planning Director’s Association (Attachment B) found
that the average staffing level was 0.7 Code Enforcement Officers per 10,000 residents
in unincorporated parts of California.
Page 141 of 182
Item 8a
A similar survey was conducted by a member of CACEO in 2021 (the findings for which
are displayed in Figure 1.3 below). The survey revealed an average of 0.5 Code
Enforcement professionals per 10,000 residents amongst jurisdictions that participated in
the survey.
Figure 1.3
Jurisdiction Staff Population Staff per
10,000
Amador county 1 CEO 40,446 0.02
City of Pittsburg 3 CEOs, 1 Intern 71,422 0.56
City of Monrovia 4 CEOs, 1 Manager 40,000 0.13
Simi Valley 4 CEOs, 1 Sr CEO, 1 CET, 1 Manager 130,000 + 0.54
City of Kerman 2 Code Compliance Officers 55,000 0.36
Ventura County 1 Director, 3 Sr CEOs, 7 CEOs, 2 CETs 324,000 0.40
City of El Cerrito 1 CEO 25,000 0.40
City of East Palo Alto 3 CEOs 30,000 1.00
Sutter County 2 CEOs 96,807 0.21
City of Goleta 2 CEOs, 1 PT admin 32,690 0.76
City of Tracy 4 CEOs, 2 Parking Intern 95,000 0.63
Healdsburg 1 PT CEO 12,000 0.83
City of Covina 2 CEOs, 1 PT CEO, 1 Volunteer, .25 Analyst 48,000 0.57
The City of SLO has roughly 1.24 employees in the Code Enforcement Division per
10,000 residents when fully staffed; however, the division has consistently had at least
one vacancy across three positions over the last two years. While the allocation of Code
Enforcement positions in the City is greater than the average, it should be noted that there
are several factors in the City that require more code enforcement resources than another
city of a similar size, including: a significant renter and student population, a number of
specialized enforcement programs (such as creek area regulations, Styrofoam, straws,
shopping cart enforcement, and proactive neighborhood enforcement), and the fact that
the official population of the City does n ot accurately reflect the daytime population that
includes visitors and those who work in the City but do not live here. It is also unclear
whether the surveyed jurisdictions utilize specialists (i.e., stormwater) as described earlier
in this report, or whether jurisdictions have similar tasks assigned to the respective Code
Enforcement Divisions.
1.3 Roles & Responsibilities
Code Enforcement Technicians and Officers are responsible for the enforcement of
several regulations including local ordinances and state codes. The responsibilities
carried out by the Code Enforcement Officers are unique to the position, however, there
are many instances in which CEOs will enforce those regulations typically managed by
both CET positions. Additionally, those duties assigned to the Code Enforcement
Page 142 of 182
Item 8a
Technician II position encompass several elements related to safe housing enforcement,
outreach and education as well as all of the duties assigned to the Code Enforcement
Technician I or Neighborhood Services Specialist position. Responsibilities of each
position are outlined in Attachment C.
Part 2: “Into the Weeds”
The core services provided by Code Enforcement Officers focus on the resolution of
complex and technically challenging issues. These issues typically require a high degree
of technical expertise and investment of time to find equitable and achievable solutions.
Part two of this report outlines the details of how the code enforcement process works,
the type and amount of work assigned to the team, and the strat egies used to gain
compliance.
2.1 Investigation Requests and Case Assignment
The majority of the code enforcement cases processed by the City are complaint-based
cases, meaning that a community member contacted the City to report a potential code
violation. Reported violations are received via email, telephone, in person , or through the
city’s centralized resident inquiry system, AskSLO. Assign ment of investigation requests
are determined based on the type of violations reported and the priority level of the
reported violation. Priority levels are determined by previously approved designations
brought to council in 2017 as shown here:
Timeframe for
Response
Activities/Situations Covered
Priority 1:
Immediate Response
Dangerous Buildings
Dangerous Utilities or Materials
Examples include car accidents that damage a
building, structure fires or assessment after an
earthquake, unpermitted construction that poses an
immediate public safety risk to occupants or
surrounding properties.
Priority 2:
24 Hour Response
Active construction without a permit
Substandard housing- no water, heat, unsafe use
Illegal/Unsafe sewage/electrical/
gas/discharge/dumping
Unsecured buildings- accessible to unauthorized
persons
Public Nuisance- e.g., refrigerator left outside
Unsafe Occupancy
Priority 3:
48 Hour Response
Illegal/Unpermitted construction (completed)
Garage conversion/non-habitable space used for
occupancy/commercial use in residential space/zone
Grading without a permit
Interior infestation of vermin
Unsafe Occupancy- e.g., living in commercial building
Page 143 of 182
Item 8a
Priority 4:
72 Hour Response
Noise and odor violations
Business License/TOT/Vacation Rentals
Polystyrene/ Straws/Water bottles
Signs
Animals & waste
Fence heights & locations
Exterior infestation of vermin
Priority 4 (Proactive):
72 Hour Response
Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance (NEO) violations:
Overgrown weeds
Visible storage/abandoned vehicles/furniture on roof
Front yard parking
Screening of refuse containers
Graffiti
Premise identification
Priority 4 (Complaint
only):
72 Hour Response
Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance (NEO) violations:
Front yard paving
Fences
Deteriorated Paint
Parking lots
Planning Permit violations
Deteriorated pavement or pathways on private
property
While code enforcement cases primarily begin with a complaint filed with the City, cases
are also discovered in ways other than direct complaints from the community. Sometimes
a violation is identified when a property is researched by a resident, owner, or realtor.
Other violations are identified during routine safety inspections such as “business
inspections” and “bar checks” conducted during operating hours to understand
operational safety issues like overcrowding. Some are found incidentally by staff working
in the community performing other tasks such as neighborhood parking enforcement,
investigation of official police complaints, and other business activities of the City.
Once a complaint is received and assigned to a code enforcement of ficer, the officer will
investigate to determine if an actual violation has occurred. This process depends on the
type of violation but generally involves several preliminary steps to ensure a proper
investigation. Prior to beginning any inspection, an officer will typically review current and
historical property information for the parcel in which a violation is reported. This
information includes active and approved land use and building permits, property
ownership, active and past code enforcement activity, and any other pertinent research
that will ensure accurate determinations while in the field. When research is complete,
the officer will move forward with planning a site visit to attempt an inspection. Depending
on the reported violation a site visit may require interior access to a building or yard or
may be viewed from the public right of way. When an interior inspection is required, the
officer must attempt to contact the resident or property owner by either performing an
impromptu visit and requesting access or mailing a site inspection request. Factors such
as officer safety, access to building entrances, and past interactions with residents may
Page 144 of 182
Item 8a
play a role in determining the appropriate method of requesting access. In any case, code
enforcement officers are required to comply with the Fourth Amendment when inspecting
private property that cannot be observed from areas open to the public, which will
generally require either the owner’s consent to enter or a warrant from the Court.
During an inspection, officers are expected to collect the necessary evidence and
documentation relating to the reported violation all while maintaining a high level of
customer service and situational awareness to ensure the safety of the officer. After a site
visit is completed, an officer will generally perform follow-up research such as web-based
investigation, review of previously approved plans for past permits, research into
applicable regulations, and discussions with appropriate city staff. Once th ese steps are
completed, the officer will make a determination as to whether a violation exists. Not all
complaints received by the City are actual violations. Those complaints determined to be
unverified or unfounded are recorded via the AskSLO software. Once a violation is
confirmed and a case is opened, the assigned officer is responsible for determining the
best course of action in order to gain compliance. The goal of the officer is to gain
compliance utilizing the lowest level of enforcement possible. The preferred outcome for
any identified violation is to inform and educate the property owner in an effort to gain
voluntary compliance. If voluntary compliance can be achieved using only education, then
a case can be closed quickly without the use of escalating enforcement tactics.
When voluntary compliance is no longer an option, officers will evaluate each specific
scenario to determine how to proceed. Typically, a notice of violation (NOV) will be issued,
which provides notice to the owner of the violation, a time period to cure the violation, and
possible next steps if the owner does not comply. In general, the available options to gain
compliance are:
Issuance of Administrative Fines
Recordation of NOV on property
Nuisance abatement proceedings
Civil proceeding
Criminal citation/proceedings
Appointment of Receiver per Health & Safety Code § 17980.7
In most cases, the Administrative Citation Process (explained below) is the primary tool
that is used to communicate with the property owner, identify the corrections that need to
occur, and establish the penalties associated with non-compliance. This procedure relies
on noticing, education, and face to face contact to avoid the need to escalate a problem
to a citation and fine whenever possible. The property owner can contest the City's
allegation of a code violation using a multi-part appeal process. The appeal process for
disputing the alleged violation is spelled out in Section 1.24 of the City's Municipal Code
and includes a review by the Department Head ("Director's Determination"), and
progresses to a review by a hearing officer, administrative review board, or the
Construction Board of Appeal (CBOA), as specified. There is also a process for court
action that the property owner may pursue beyond those provided in the Municipal Code
to seek review of the relevant reviewing officer or body’s decision. (Note, appeals of
administrative citations issued under Section 1.24 are not appealable to the City Council .)
Page 145 of 182
Item 8a
2.2 Administrative Citation Process
A City is authorized to develop an administrative citation process per Government Code
section 53069.4. If a notice of violation is issued and staff does not receive a response,
or the property owner responds but is unwilling to make the required corrections even
after a director’s review upholds the notice of violation , then code enforcement officers
have the discretion to issue an administrative citation, which includes a fee, to further
encourage compliance. Citations are issued as a written letter and are posted at the
building site and sent by regular and certified mail. The citations are due to be paid to the
City within 10 days. A property owner has the right to appeal a citation. There is currently
no explicit penalty for failure to pay within 10 days; however, a subsequent citation for an
increased amount can be issued at the expiration of that 10 -day period after staff confirms
that the violation still exists. Eventually, a violation that is ignored could result in daily
fines; however, most cases are resolved before this point, or staff identifies financial
issues that make fines an ineffective method to achieve compliance.
In instances where code violations are resolved, but fines remain unpaid , the City may
pursue all legal, equitable, and administrative remedies for the collection of unpaid civil
administrative fines. Unpaid fines become delinquent after 30 days and are subject to
interest accrual of 8% per month as stated in SLOMC 1.24.070(C). Failure to pay fines
may also result in the suspension of any pending applications or permits and can be
forwarded to a collection agency for payment.
The effectiveness of current collection practices is limited. Invoicing software used by the
City does not allow for the automatic accrual of interest, collection agencies are unable
to affect credit as with other debt, and the withholding or suspension of permits is not
always an option. While the City does have the ability to pursue unpaid fines through civil
proceedings, the amount of the unpaid fines does not normally warrant the staff time
required for this process. Staff has been looking at options for invoicing to be completed
via the finance department, as is the current process for administrative citations issued
by the Police department. This shift may aid in the implementation of accrued interest in
the future.
The administrative citation process and fines vary depending on the type of violation
identified by the City as explained below.
Property Maintenance Standards Violations
The majority of citations issued are for Property Maintenance Standards (SLOMC 17.76)
violations. The provisions of this code section are meant to protect the appearance,
character, and conditions of neighborhoods in the City, and generally relate to property
maintenance standards. Citations for property maintenance under SLOMC 17.76 have
been issued for violations such as vehicles parked in a yard, overgrown vegetation,
graffiti, screening of trash receptacles, furniture on a roof, and other violations as further
detailed in the roles and responsibilities section above. As established per Resolution no.
10347, there are three escalating fine amounts for these citations as listed in the chart
below.
Page 146 of 182
Item 8a
Timing of Issuance
(minimum) Amount
1st Citation 10 days after notice to
correct/notice of violation
$50.00
2nd Citation 10 days after 1st citation $100.00
3rd Citation 10 days after 2nd citation $200.00
Repeat within 12 months Immediate issuance Restart @, 1st citation
As a number of these violations occur at rental properties that are in the control of the
tenant and are related to behaviors (e.g., unscreened trash cans, parking on the lawn),
staff ensures that both the tenant and the property owner are fully aware of the violations.
Posting the notice of violation at the site and mailing it to the owner accomplishes the
notification goal. Ensuring proper notification is imperative because the property owner is
legally responsible for correcting all cited violations and payment of associated fines.
Building, Health and Safety, and Zoning Code Violations
As established in via Resolution no. 10894, citations issued by code staff for violation of
building, health and safety, and zoning codes (except 17.76) are currently subject to the
following penalty amounts:
Timing of Issuance
(minimum) Amount
1st Citation 10 days after notice $100.00
2nd Citation 10 days after 1st citation $500.00
3rd Citation 10 days after 2nd citation $1000.00
Repeat within 12 months Immediate issuance Restart at 1st citation
The citations above are issued for violation of the following regulations, described in more
detail below:
SLOMC Title 8 is the Health and Safety code for the city and includes the
regulations for expanded polystyrene, offensive odors, secondhand smoke control,
plastic water bottles, plastic straw regulations and Abandoned shopping carts.
SLOMC Title 9 is the Public Peace, Morals, and Welfare code and includes
regulations for cannabis cultivation & operator permits, noise control, and
cardroom provisions.
SLOMC Title 10 is the Vehicles & Traffic code and includes regulat ions for the
abatement of inoperative vehicles.
SLOMC Title 12 is the Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places code and includes
provisions for creek regulations and urban stormwater management.
SLOMC Title 14 is the Community Preservation code and includes regulations
regarding the historic preservation ordinance.
Page 147 of 182
Item 8a
SLOMC Title 17 is the zoning code and includes land use regulations, setbacks,
fence height regulations, night sky preservation, parking space requirements,
performance standards, use permit conditions (Exclusive of SLOMC 17.76).
SLOMC Title 15 includes the following adopted Building and Property Maintenance
standards as modified for local use:
California Building Code California Energy Code
California Residential Code California Green Building Standards
Californian Fire Code California Historical Code
California Electrical Code California Existing Building Code
California Mechanical Code 2021 International Property Maintenance
Code
California Plumbing Code 1997 Uniform Housing Code
1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement
of Dangerous Buildings
2.3 Current and Past Workload
Since the implementation of a centralized resident inquiry system (AskSLO ) at the end of
calendar year 2022, requests for investigation have increased 65% when compared to
the average of the three fiscal years prior to the COVID pandemic. Requests received
during the COVID pandemic were not reflective of a typical fiscal year a s the Code
Enforcement division was tasked with responding to all complaints regarding state health
regulations in addition to general requests. The city experienced an atypical increase in
total requests received during the 2019-20, 2020-21 fiscal years; however, requests for
investigation related to “COVID regulations” became the priority and a decrease in
general requests was seen as shown in figure 2.1. The types of requests received vary
from year to year, but to a certain degree, the ratios of request types remain consistent.
A general idea of the types of requests received within a fiscal year can be found in figure
2.2.
Page 148 of 182
Item 8a
Figure 2.1 - Code enforcement requests for past seven fiscal years
Requests for Investigation
Fiscal
Year
2016-
17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-
22
2022-
23
Normal COVID Normal COVID
Jul 64 72 39 60 0 29 95 42 48
Aug 62 62 42 55 0 34 94 36 59
Sep 63 53 30 55 0 35 49 41 38
Oct 54 32 50 54 0 73 72 28 80
Nov 38 34 63 39 0 39 91 30 80
Dec 25 44 48 17 0 68 128 40 110
Jan 32 39 33 40 0 38 43 45 83
Feb 35 54 45 35 0 39 17 27 61
Mar 59 50 52 18 25 50 23 47 75
Apr 45 86 43 28 59 39 18 32 100
May 55 57 38 23 33 31 8 23 103
Jun 43 54 37 28 77 46 0 39 115
452 194 521 638
TOTALS 575 637 520 646 1159 430 952
Page 149 of 182
Item 8a
Figure 2.2 - Code enforcement requests for investigation for fiscal year 2022-23
Requests for Investigation -FY 2022-23
Abandoned Shopping Carts 170 Use Permit Violations 8
Overgrown Vegetation (Dead,
Decayed, Infested, Diseased) 64 Maintenance of Private Drainage 7
Health & Safety Violations 53 Inoperative Vehicle in Public View 6
Unpermitted Construction (Active) 53 Creek Regulations 6
Fence/Wall/Hedge Height 52 Temporary Signs Violation 6
Waste Containers 41
Basketball Hoops in Street or
Sidewalk 5
Graffiti & Vandalism 38 Expanded Polystyrene 4
Transient Encampment on Private
Property 33 Setback/Height Regulations 4
Visible Storage 30
Deteriorated Structures &
Machines 3
Unpermitted Construction (Completed) 30
Recreational Vehicle Used as
Residence 3
Shrubs/Trees in Right of Way 25
Substandard Housing (Owner
Occupied) 3
Other Violations 25 Vision Clearance at Intersections 3
Noise Violation 23 Furniture on Roof 2
Substandard Rental Housing (Tenant
Occupied) 20 Parking Space Requirements 2
Land Use Violation 13 Maintenance of Vacant Structures
or Land 2
Lighting & Night Sky Preservation 11 Animals 2
Front Yard Parking 11 Offensive Odors 2
Unsafe Occupancy 11 Deteriorated Paint & Finish 1
Fences/Walls/Hedges Maintenance 10 Front Yard Paving 1
Unpermitted Signs 9 Unsecured Buildings 1
TOTAL 793
Actual response times in which requests are addressed depend on several factors ;
however, the most important factor tends to be existing staffing levels. For fiscal year
2022-23, the overall response rate, or number of requests that were addressed within the
timeframe established by priority level, was 75.9%. The response rate for the previous
fiscal year 2021-22 was 79.8%. The numbers for both most recent fiscal years fell short
of the division’s target goal of an 85% response rate. This shortcoming appears to be
directly correlated to staffing levels, as shown in figure 2.3.
Page 150 of 182
Item 8a
Figure 2.3 - Isolated date ranges showing response rate based on staffing level.
Date Range Staffing Status
Percent of Code
Enforcement cases
investigated on-time
07/01/21– 10/14/21 Fully Staffed 87.2%
10/14/21– 07/21/22 Missing CET II and CEO (serving
dual roles - Supervisor & Officer) 75.6 %
07/21/22– 01/13/23 Fully Staffed 86.1%
01/13/23– 06/30/23 Missing CET I & CET II 62.6%
The number of code enforcement cases opened after initial investigation over the past
seven fiscal years are shown in figure 2.4. The data shows a sharp decrease in the
number of cases after the 2019-2020 fiscal year. While it is difficult to identify the exact
reasons for this decrease, the combined lack of staff and shift in focus during and after
the COVID pandemic may have contributed. For example, limitations on the enforcement
of sign regulations and a prioritization of voluntary compliance were put in place to meets
the needs of the community during the pandemic. Additionally, as a result of the CET I
vacancy and enactment of the Fiscal Health Contingency Plan in January 2023, the
workload of the CET I shifted to the two existing Code Enforcement Officers and, in an
effort to maintain the level of service expected from the community regarding response s
to reported violations, all proactive neighborhood wellness enforcement was placed on
hold The decline in neighborhood services (NSS) cases can be seen at the bottom of
Figure 2.4, where the total cases for each fiscal year are separated by type of case. This
breakdown shows that the number of non-neighborhood wellness cases (Code cases)
are comparable to pre-COVID numbers while the number of NSS cases have declined
compared to pre-COVID numbers.
Page 151 of 182
Item 8a
Figure 2.4 - Code enforcement cases for past seven fiscal years
Opened Cases
Fiscal Year 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
Jul 66 67 46 83 35 31 37
Aug 107 86 84 89 40 35 32
Sep 119 80 60 81 68 66 80
Oct 103 65 94 102 29 42 62
Nov 103 68 86 65 38 43 34
Dec 85 44 77 31 23 33 46
Jan 75 55 84 74 48 47 23
Feb 83 75 82 88 53 54 15
Mar 132 53 87 67 103 79 18
Apr 96 68 91 128 106 41 23
May 117 74 86 81 38 35 36
Jun 47 42 50 38 75 45 22
Total Cases 1133 777 927 927 656 551 428
Proactive
NSS 561 407 537 573 408 297 109
Reported
NSS 308 159 139 120 82 79 108
Code Cases 264 211 251 234 166 175 211
Part 3: Safe Housing
This section outlines the evolution of the Safe Housing program which includes a history
of a previously implemented Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP), the repeal of
that program, and the current complaint-based approach. Safe housing remains a top
priority for staff. As previously stated above, unsafe housing is considered a level 2 priority
that prompts staff to respond to complaints within 24 hours.
3.1 History of Rental Housing Inspection Program in the City
San Luis Obispo ranks among the top eight percent of California cities with a population
exceeding 25,000 in terms of the percentage of housing units that are rental units,
according to data from the 2020 Census. The number of rental units in the city is about
61 percent of all housing units, compared to the statewide average rental rate of 45
percent. The safety of available residential rental units within the city has been a subject
of concern for the past two decades. In March 2005, Council considered a Rental Property
Inspection Program, but elected to limit the program to state-mandated fire safety
inspections of multifamily rental units. Council again considered aspects of a program in
2009 but did not pursue expanding the existing fire safety inspection program.
Page 152 of 182
Item 8a
As part of the 2013-15 Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal, staff was directed to
pursue the creation of a Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP) to address growing
concerns regarding the safety of residential rental units in the city. In May 2015, staff
provided an in-depth report outlining a fiscally sustainable program that led to the
adoption of Ordinance 1616 (2015 Series) establishing a RHIP. In the following months,
a Code Enforcement Supervisor and Administrative Assistant were hired to begin the
implementation of the program elements. The elements of the program included
application, registration, fee collection, notification of inspection and inspection
procedures, inspection and re-inspection, self-certification, and annual fee collection and
reporting. The two new staff members worked to create a database of approximately
5,000 rental units subject to the RHIP within the city and began sending notices of
registration requirements and upcoming inspections.
In May 2016, two Code Enforcement Technician II positions were filled to serve as the
inspectors for the Rental Housing Inspection Program and began performing inspections
shortly thereafter. From May 2016 until the repeal of the RHIP ordinance in Februa ry of
2017, inspectors performed inspections of approximately 915 rental units. Of the 915
inspected units, 62 percent passed (16 percent after one inspection, 46 percent after two
inspections), while 37 percent had outstanding corrections and/or missing permits for
construction. In early 2017, Council made the decision to repeal the RHIP ordinance in
its entirety (Ordinance No. 1632 (2017 Series).) Without the program and associated fees,
there was no fiscal support to maintain the four positions created f or the program. The
Administrative Assistant, Code Enforcement Supervisor , and Code Enforcement
Technician II positions were phased out by June of 2017. Following the repeal of the RHIP
and phase-out of positions funded by the program, any properties with open violations
were forwarded to the remaining code enforcement staff to ensure compliance.
Following the repeal of the Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP), staff was directed
to evaluate opportunities to promote safe housing in the community withou t the use of
mandatory inspections. City staff conducted a series of individual community interviews
to gather feedback and input on code enforcement priorities and the focus of the program
post-RHIP. Seventeen interviews were conducted of members of the public who signed
up for the opportunity to have a one-on-one discussion with members of City staff on the
subject. In general, the responses were supportive of the staff’s recommendation to
develop a program that focuses on safe housing and prioritize code enforcement activities
and responses related to unsafe occupancies.
Staff appeared before Council in November of 2017 to present, take public testimony,
and request Council direction regarding the following items:
Overall code enforcement priorities to guide the allocation of staff time and other
resources in the Building and Safety Division of the Community Development
Department (CDD);
Direction regarding the use of enforcement tools - such as recorded notices of
violation and increased and new fees and fines - to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of code enforcement activities;
The scope and priority of a Safe Housing Outreach and Education Program for
landlords and tenants; and
Page 153 of 182
Item 8a
Additional enforcement activities and programs to pursue as resources permit.
As a result of the November 2017 City Council meeting, staff received support for all
recommendations except for pursuance of a safe housing voluntary inspection program
and/or self-certification program. Additionally, direction from Council resulted in a
reclassification of an existing Code Enforcement Technician I position as Code
Enforcement Supervisor and the rewriting of the job duties for the Code Enforcement
Technician II to encompass the current duties of the Safe Housing Specialist.
The newly re-written Code Enforcement Technician II/Safe Housing Specialist position
was briefly filled from November 2021 through February 2022 and, after a short vacancy,
again from April 2022 through January 2023. During the timeframes in which th e CET II
position was filled, a significant work effort to develop the Safe Housing Outreach and
Education Program was completed. With the goal of providing proactive education and
outreach for the empowerment of tenants to recognize, and work with propert y owners
and/or code enforcement staff, to abate substandard conditions, staff set out to connect
with stakeholders such as CalPoly, SLO Coastal Association of Realtors, People ’s Self-
Help Housing, and local property management groups to discuss the potent ial for
meetings, presentations, and distribution of information. In late 2022, staff also completed
three focus group sessions with participants such as property owners, tenants, and local
property management groups to begin open dialogue on the expectations of safe housing
and to collect input on what aspects of a proposed program may yield a high level of
participation (Attachment D).
3.2 Current Approach to Safe Housing
Program development was expected to continue into 2023 with additional community
outreach, development of clear policies and procedures, and implementation of a pilot
program; however, due to the vacancy of the CET II position beginning in January,
enactment of the Fiscal Health Contingency Plan with associated hiring chill from January
through August of this year, and the vacancy of the CET I position requiring existing staff
to assume additional work duties, all program development was placed on hold. A
recruitment for the CET II position is currently underway. Prior to this position becoming
vacant in January of 2023, staff was exploring developing a program that focused on
communicating renter rights, mediation services, tenant and landlord responsibilities, and
venues to share this information.
In anticipation of the filling of the CET II position, and in response to public comment
received by the City, staff has already begun identifying actions related to safe housing
that can be completed in the near-term as part of the Safe Housing program. This includes
the creation of a guide for tenants/landlords regarding safe housing (Attachment E) and
the creation of a tenant/landlord webpage where both tenants and landlords can find
pertinent information and resources. However, other than these types of outreach
assignments, all other responsibilities of the CET II position are currently being completed
by Code Enforcement Officers. These responsibilities have been limited to reactive
response to reported violations.
Page 154 of 182
Item 8a
The Code Enforcement Division received 84 requests for investigation relating to
substandard housing between October 20, 2022, and September 21, 2023. Of those
received requests, 24 code enforcement cases were opened after violations were
confirmed and 5 were resolved on site. The remaining requests were either determined
to be unfounded or unable to be verified as depicted in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1 – Requests for investigation dispositions
The primary responsibility of the Safe Housing Specialist (CET II) position is to investigate
substandard housing in rental units. These investigations only occur when staff is notified
of a condition through a complaint. Current ly, anyone from the public can submit a
complaint, and complaints can be submitted anonymously. However, due to the direction
staff received from City Council in November 2017, staff has not pursued any non-
complaint-based enforcement actions for rental units. Code Enforcement Officers have
continued prioritizing the investigation of substandard housing complaints even with the
current vacancy.
The City of SLO Fire Department performs annual inspections of multifamily residential
buildings. California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.2 mandates that local fire
departments inspect all apartments annually. An apartment complex consists of three or
more attached units and excludes all duplex and townhome buildings as defined by code.
These annual inspections include verifying the functionality of fire suppression systems,
fire alarms, and general life and safety requirements such as adequate means of egress.
However, unless invited in by tenants, fire inspectors do not enter nor inspect indivi dual
dwelling units. The Fire Department presented its 2022 annual report on these
inspections to Council in June 2023.
Code Cases
Created/
Resolved
29
Unfounded/
Unable to Verify
54
SUBSTANDARD HOUSING COMPLAINTS
OCTOBER 2022 -SEPTEMBER 2023
Page 155 of 182
Item 8a
Part 4: Council Focus Questions
This study session is an opportunity for the City Council and community to hear about
code enforcement in the City. In addition, staff will be available at the City Council
meeting to answer questions about the contents of th is report. The City Council may wish
to consider the following broad questions during the Study Session.
1. Is the program achieving the outcomes of the council and community?
2. What information can the Community Development Department provide to help
the community navigate the code enforcement process and services?
3. What information would be most helpful to provide specifically for landlords and
tenants in the City?
4. Do you generally concur with the existing priority hierarchy of cases?
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
As described in this report, the City Council has discussed code enforcement and safe
housing issues extensively in the past. Previous actions are noted below.
March 1, 2005 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Rental property inspection program.
Review and discuss options for rental property inspections.
Provide staff with direction on which options to pursue, with a focus on f ull
cost recovery regardless of which option the Council selects.
o Action: Limit program to state mandated fire safety inspections of multifamily
rental units. (Minutes)
September 29, 2009 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Strategies to reduce neighborhood noise and party
disturbances.
Receive a report outlining various strategies to reduce the occurrences of
neighborhood disturbances created by excessive noise and party activity;
Provide direction to staff regarding the following strategies and programs:
a. Noise ordinance modifications
b. Unruly gathering ordinance
c. Nighttime curfew ordinance
d. Strategic use of Safety Enhancement Zone Ordinance
e. Residential rental property licensing options
Direct to staff to return to Council in January 2010 with any recommended
ordinances and procedural changes.
o Action: Council direction staff to move forward with options B, C and D and to
return to Council in January 2010 with recommended ordinances and
procedural changes. (Minutes)
Page 156 of 182
Item 8a
December 16, 2014 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Review of rental housing inspection program options.
Receive a presentation on Rental Housing Inspection Program policy
options.
Provide direction to staff regarding initiation of an ordinance and specific
options to pursue.
o Action: Council vote to create a Rental Housing Inspection Program for single
– family and duplex rental within the following parameters (Minutes):
1. Scope of Inspection: Both exterior and interior inspections.
2. Frequency of Inspection: 3 years.
3. Incentives:
a. Self- certification after passing initial inspection.
b. System and standards to authorize self -certification period.
4. Disincentives: High fines or re-inspection fees.
5. Potential Exemptions:
a. Owner – occupied units (or occupancy by an immediate family member
without other renters).
b. Units in mobile home parks.
c. Publicly owned or managed housing.
d. Units governed by homeowner associations.
6. Set fees at full cost recovery.
May 5, 2015 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Rental housing inspection program.
Adopt an Ordinance amending Title 15 of the Municipal Code by adding
Chapter 15.10 establishing a Rental Housing Inspection Program;
and Adopt a Resolution establishing fees to implement the Rental Housing
Inspection Program; and Adopt a Resolution establishing an amnesty
program for one year for properties subject to the proposed Rental Housing
Inspection Program who voluntarily report and abate health and safety
violations.
o Action: Ordinance (#1616) & Resolutions (#10613 & #10614)
adopted. (Minutes)
February 16, 2017 – Special Meeting of the City Council (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Workshop to allow community members to provide input
regarding issues and solutions for the RHIP.
o Action: Council voted to suspend new mandatory inspections and conclude
existing code compliance cases under the program. (Minutes)
March 7, 2017 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: An ordinance repealing chapter 15.10 rental housing
inspection program of title 15 of the municipal code.
Introduce an Ordinance to repeal Chapter 15.10 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code regarding Rental Housing Inspection.
o Action: Council voted to introduce Ordinance No. 1632 entitled, " An Ordinance
Page 157 of 182
Item 8a
of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, repealing chapter
15. 10 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code regarding Rental Housing
Inspection." (Minutes)
March 7, 2017 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Process to develop code enforcement priorities for proactive
and complaint-based enforcement activities.
Receive Direction on the following questions:
Council Direction Item #1: Does the City Council support the use of
the “Consult” level of public engagement to gain feedback from the
public on revised code enforcement priorities and approaches to
achieving compliance with standards and regulations?
Council Direction Item #2: Are there specific code enforcement
programs/approaches that the Council would like staff to focus on or
exclude during the effort to revise priorities, with the baseline being
the ideas presented at the February 16, 2017, workshop or that have
otherwise emerged?
Council Direction Item #3: Does the City Council wish to evaluate
modifying existing enforcement tools to promote health and safety
objectives, including changing the City’s cost recovery objectives for
code enforcement? Increased cost recovery associated with its code
enforcement activities could be a way of supporting current or
additional proactive approaches, such as renter/property owner
education efforts, or to support program staffing. \
Council Direction Item #4: Should mandatory fines be associated
with violations rather than using discretion to determine when to
issue a citation and collect a fine?
Council Direction Item #5: The City’s experience with respect to the
most common types of violations will inform the priorities it proposes
to the City Council in the future. Are there any types of violations that
the City Council does not consider a priority for enforcement?
o Action: By consensus, Council directed staff to receive and file a presentation
on the status of Community Development code enforcement activities in the
City of San Luis Obispo and provided staff with direction on the development
of revised code enforcement priorities for the 2017- 19 Financial
Plan. (Minutes)
November 21, 2017 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Code enforcement priorities.
Receive a presentation, take public testimony, and provide direction to staff
regarding:
Overall code enforcement priorities to guide the allocation of staff
time and other resources in the Building and Safety Division of the
Community Development Department (CDD); and
Direction regarding the use of enforcement tools - such as recorded
notices of violation and increased and new fees and fines - to
Page 158 of 182
Item 8a
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of code enforcement
activities; and
The scope and priority of a Safe Housing Outreach and Education
Program for landlords and tenants; and
Additional program activities and enhancements to pursue as
resources permit.
o Action: Council supported staff's recommendation without the voluntary
inspections program and self -certification program. Staff to return with
Ordinances and/ or Resolutions to implement the changes to the code
enforcement process and a new fine structure. (Minutes)
May 15, 2018 – City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: An ordinance amending chapter 1.24 (administrative code
enforcement procedures) of title 1 to the San Luis Obispo municipal co de; and
a resolution of the City Council of the city of San Luis Obispo, California,
amending the amount of administrative fines payable under certain citations.
Introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Chapter 1.24 (Administrative Code
Enforcement Procedures) of Title 1 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code”;
and
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, amending the amount of administrative fines payable
under certain citations” to adopt and implement the recommended amended
administrative fine schedule for violations of Titles 8, 15, and 17 (except
Chapter 17.17).
o Action: Council supported staff's recommendation without the voluntary
inspections program and self -certification program. Staff to return with
Ordinances and/ or Resolutions to implement the changes to the code
enforcement process and a new fine structure.
o Action: Council voted to adopt both the in troduced ordinance (#1648) and
resolution (#10894). (Minutes)
May 7, 2019– City Council Meeting (Council Agenda Report)
o Item Discussed: Resolution establishing authorizing designated staff to waive
administrative fines resulting from code enforcement action.
o Action: Council voted to adopt proposed resolution (#11007). (Minutes)
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
No specific outreach was conducted for this study session; however, the following
outreach was conducted regarding safe housing:
May 2017 – Voluntary interviews with participating members of the public to discuss
community perspective of Code Enforcement priorities and safe housing self-certification
program.
Page 159 of 182
Item 8a
November 2022 – Focus Groups (See Attachment D)
Upon filling of the Safe Housing Specialist (CET II) position identification of opportunities
for proactive outreach will commence. Opportunities may include:
Participation in CalPoly programs related to off-student housing,
Providing information regarding safe housing to tenants and landlords.
Providing brochures and information regarding safe housing to property
management companies for distribution.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the recommended
action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15378. As a study session, this item is informational only and is not
binding on future actions.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2023-24
Funding Identified: No
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $ $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $ $ $ $
This study session itself does not have any direct fiscal impacts as it is for informational
purposes only. The table below shows the revenues produced by the Code Enforcement
team over the last six fiscal years. In 2016, the City reevaluated its use of special
assessments and property liens to collect administrative fines in light of the Ninth Circuit’s
decision in Mechammil vs. City of San Jacinto. Prior to the decision in this case, citations
could be attached as a lien to real property and collected at the same time and in the
same manner as property taxes. Though the Mechammil decision was not published, the
legislative history supporting the decision is substantial, and it would likely be upheld at
the state level, so the City has since refrained from utilizing the special assessment and
property lien process to collect administrative fines.
Page 160 of 182
Item 8a
The table below reflects the revenues that staff was able to collect through the process
outlined in Part 2.2 of this report, despite not being able to place liens on real property.
The decrease in revenues during fiscal year 2021-22 is consistent with staff’s
enforcement approach during the Covid-19 pandemic. The further decrease in revenues
for fiscal year 2022-23 is consistent with staff vacancies and a lack of proactive code
enforcement by Neighborhood Services Specialist positions. The fee structure (listed
above) was last updated by City Council in 2018.
Code Enforcement Fees
Fiscal Year 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23
Revenues $108,947 $80,328 $86,562 $90,879 $61,695 $46,560
ALTERNATIVES
There are no alternative actions as this presentation is an overview of Code Enforcement
in the City of San Luis Obispo.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Historical timeline of Code Enforcement
B - California County Planning Director’s Association Survey
C - Responsibilities of Code Enforcement positions
D - Focus Group Agendas
E - Safe Housing Education and Outreach Brochure
Page 161 of 182
Page 162 of 182
2015
2010
2017
2022
Abandoned shopping cart
enforcement
Review, and enforcement
of Abandoned Shopping
Cart Prevention and
Retrieval Plans
Graffiti abatement
2018
2020
2023
1990
2000
2010
2020
2021
1980
1970
2023
1977
Authority to designate Zoning Officer and Chief
Building Official as public officers for code
enforcement
Staffing History
Smoking in certain areas
Offensive odors
Polystyrene regulations
CODE ENFORCEMENT HISTORY
1995
Office of Neighborhood Services established in
CDD. Zoning Investigations Coordinator retitled
to Neighborhood Services Manager
Zoning Investigations Coordinator position
established
2000
Neighborhood Services Manager transferred to
PD. Code Enforcement Coordinator position
established.
2012
Two (2) Neighborhood Services Specialists hired
2007
A second Code Enforcement Officer position is
established.
2015
Rental Housing Inspection Program adopted.
Code Enforcement Supervisor position
established
Code Enforcement Administrative Assistant
position established.
2016
Two (2) Code Enforcement Technician II positions
established
Neighborhood Services Specialist positions
retitled to Code Enforcement Technician I
2017
Rental Housing Inspection Program repealed.
Code Enforcement Supervisor, Administrative
Assistant and (2) Code Enforcement Technician
II positions eliminated.
Code Enforcement Technician I position vacant.
Job
Duties
Creek Regulations
Regulation of Single-use
plastic water bottles on city
property
Single-use straw regulation
Cannabis Regulations
(Personal cultivation)
Regulation of Cannabis
establishments
Shrubs/trees in PROW
Basketball hoops in PROW
Stormwater compliance
2023
Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer
transferred to Code Enforcement Division
CET I & CET II positions approved to fill, expected
to be filled by end of year.
2018
Reclassification of Code Enforcement
Technician I position to Code Enforcement
Supervisor position. Code Enforcement
Technician II position left vacant to offset
funding for supervisor position.
2021
Code Enforcement Supervisor position filled by
existing Code Enforcement Officer on interim
basis. Code Enforcement Officer position left
vacant during interim status. Code
Enforcement Technician II (Safe Housing
Specialist) position filled.
ZIC
NSM
CEC
CEO CEO
CEO CEO NSS NSS
CEO CEO NSS NSS
CES CEAA
CETI
CES CEAA CETII CETII
CEO CEO CETI
CEO CEO CETI
CEO CEO CETICES
CES CEO CEO CETI
CETII
2022
Code Enforcement Supervisor position filled
permanently. Code Enforcement Officer I
position filled permanently.
Historical Duties
Uniform housing code
International Property
Maintenance Code
CA Building,
Residential, Fire,
Electrical, Plumbing,
Mechanical Codes.
Building, housing and
maintenance code
standards
Zoning regulations
Land use regulations
Neighborhood
preservation standards
Sign Regulations
Noise regulations
Miscellaneous regulations
Population
41,000
44,400
45,100
47,100
47,500
34,250
28,000
48,400
CETI
CETII SCEO
CES CEO CEO
CETI
CETII
CEO CEO CETICES
CETII
Page 163 of 182
Page 164 of 182
2019 Statistics regarding Code Enforcement Staffing – Counties in California
(Information from California County Planning Director’s Association list serve)
County Number of
Staff
2019
Unincorporated
Population
Staff per 1,000
Mono 2 5,612 0.36
Napa 7 26,158 0.27
Ventura 22 96,377 0.23
Mendocino 7 59,776 0.12
Mariposa 2 18,068 0.11
Sonoma 14 141,781 0.10
Calaveras 4 41,277 0.10
Sacramento 53 594,216 0.09
San Luis Obispo 11 121,855 0.09
Butte 6 78,702 0.08
Los Angeles 76 1,046,858 0.07
Madera 5 74,375 0.07
Monterey 8 107,946 0.07
Orange 9 129,128 0.07
Tulare 8 144,741 0.06
Alameda 8 149,536 0.05
San Diego 25 515,403 0.05
El Dorado 7 158,131 0.04
Merced 3 96,214 0.03
Yolo 2 61,586 0.03
Kern 7 318,006 0.02
Santa Barbara 3.5 144,503 0.02
Fresno 4 175,561 0.02
Alpine 0 1,162 0.00
Sierra 0 2,469 0.00
TOTALS 293.5 4,309,441 Mean/Median 0.07
Page 165 of 182
Page 166 of 182
Code Enforcement Technician I
(Neighborhood Service
Specialist)
Code Enforcement
Technician II
(Safe Housing
Specialist)
Code Enforcement Officer I/II
Stormwater Code
Enforcement Officer
Property Maintenance Standards
(SLOMC 17.76)
• Front yard paving (SLOMC
17.76.030)
• Front yard parking (SLOMC
17.76.040)
• Fences/walls/hedge
Maintenance (SLOMC
17.76.050)
• Neighborhood preservation
(SLOMC 17.76.060)
Abandoned buildings
Paint and finish materials
Structures and Machines
Parking areas
Vegetation
Graffiti
Violations of use permit or
approval
Public Nuisance
Roofs (SLOMC 17.76.090)
Screening (SLOMC 17.76.100)
International Property Maintenance
Code (via SLOMC 15.02.010,
15.02.130)
• Vacant structures and land
(IPMC 301.3)
• Inoperative vehicles (as seen
from PROW) (IPMC 302.8)
• Premise ID (Address
Numbers) (IPMC 304.3)
• Broken Windows (IPMC
304.13)
SLOMC Title 15
• Sign Regulations (SLOMC
15.40)
Prohibited signs (SLOMC
15.40.300) o Attention getting
devices o Banners o Outdoor displays/off-site
signs
• Sandwich board signs
(SLOMC 15.40.470)
Other SLOMC regulations
• Shrubs/trees in public right-
of-way (SLOMC 12.24.100)
• Encroachments (Basketball
hoops) (SLOMC 12.04.020)
2021 International
Property Maintenance
Code (IPMC)
1997 Uniform Housing
Code (UHC)
Uniform Code for the
Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings
CA Health & Safety Code
California Building Codes
• Building Code
• Residential
Code
• Existing
Building Code
• Fire Code
• Electrical Code
• Plumbing
Code
• Mechanical
Code
Education and Outreach
• Create
opportunities
for education
for rental unit
stakeholders
(Owners,
tenants,
property
management,
realtors etc.)
Presentations
Educational
materials
Checklists
Events
SLOMC Title 6 - Animals
SLOMC Title 8 – Health and Safety
• Polystyrene
• Single-use straws
• Secondhand smoke control
• Offensive odors
SLOMC Title 9 – Public Peach, Morals
and Welfare
• Cannabis regulations
• Noise control
• Cardroom
SLOMC Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic
• Inoperative vehicles
SLOMC Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks
and Public Places
• Encroachments (Basketball
hoops, fences)
• Stormwater (privately owned
drainage maintenance)
• Creek regulations (within
private property)
• Tree regulations (vegetation
growing into PROW)
SLOMC Title 14 - Historic preservation
ordinance
SLOMC Title 15 – Building and
Construction
• Adoption & amendments of
the following: o 2021 International
Property Maintenance
Code (IPMC) o 1997 Uniform Housing
Code (UHC) o Uniform Code for the
Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings o CA Health & Safety
Code o California Building
Codes o Building Code o Residential Code o Existing Building Code o Fire Code o Electrical Code o Plumbing Code o Mechanical Code
SLOMC Title 17 – Zoning regulations
• Use regulations
• Setbacks/height regulations
• Creek setbacks
• Fences, walls, hedges
• Lighting and night sky preservation
• Vision clearance triangle at
intersections
• Parking space requirements
• Performance standards o Air contaminants o Discharges to sewer system o Energy conservation o Hazardous materials o Heat & humidity o Light & glare o Noise o Solid waste o Vibration
• Property Maintenance Standards
(NSS Duties)
• Uses requiring permits and violations
of issued permits such as: o Use permits o Planned development permit o Architectural review approval o Variance o Development agreements o or other land use permit
• Specific Land Use Regulations o Cannabis o Convenience Stores o Day Care o Food Trucks o Fraternities and Sororities o Home occupation permit o Homestay permit o Household pets boarding
kennels o Outdoor sales on commercial
and residential lots o Recreational vehicles – use as
dwelling on private lots o Recycling facilities o Safe parking o Schools o Service/fueling stations o Vending machines o Wireless telecommunication
facilities
SLOMC Title 12.08 – Urban
Storm Water Quality
Management and Discharge
Control
• Unlawful discharge into
storm drain system
(SLOMC § 12.08.090)
• Unlawful connection to
storm drain
system/publicly owned
treatment works
(POTW) (SLOMC §
12.08.110)
• Unlawful deposit of
waste/pollution
(SLOMC §
12.08.120(A))
• Unlawful sidewalk
cross drainage
(SLOMC §
12.08.120(B))
• Failure to comply with
NPDES permit
(SLOMC § 12.08.140)
• Failure to maintain
premises, Prevention
of pollutants (SLOMC §
12.08.160(A))
• Failure to maintain
adequate BMPs at
construction sites
(SLOMC §
12.08.160(B))
• Failure to maintain
waterway on private
property (SLOMC §
12.08.170(A))
• Failure to maintain
private structures near
waterways (SLOMC §
12.08.170(B)
• Performance of
maintenance causing
adverse impact to
waterway species
(SLOMC §
12.08.170(C))
• Failure to comply with
federal/state agencies
(SLOMC §
12.08.170(C))
Page 167 of 182
Page 168 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
Housing Community Meeting 1
What is Safe Housing: Thursday November 30st, 2022, 9:00 am – 11:00 am
Library Community Room: 995 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
PURPOSE
The Housing Community Meetings will assess stakeholder input and incorporate
recommendations in the City's proposed initiative in providing a voluntary Certified Safe
Housing Program to community members. The goal of these meetings is to identify clear
objectives and feasible incentives for voluntary participation.
DESIRED MEETING OUTCOMES
1. Get to know one another, establish trust
2. Confirm understanding of the City’s approach to code enforcement and safe housing
3. Share input, establish expectations
4. Recognize unique and diverse perspectives
5. Serve as a starting point for future focus groups
AGENDA
9:00am Coffee, light snacks served
9:10am Introductions: Michael Codron (5m) & Mike Loew (5m)
Housing and Homelessness as a Major City Goal – Michael C.
Agreements, Expectations & Ground Rules – Mike L.
9:20am Staff-led discussion about the City’s approach: Austin & John (10m)
9:30am Overview, Introductions and Icebreaker: Austin (20m)
9:50am Divide group into two focus groups: John and Austin (5m)
9:55am Discussion in focus groups (40m)
10:35am Break (10m)
10:45am Reflection activity: Austin (5m)
10:50am Next Steps (5m)
10:55am Questions, feedback, departures (5m)
Page 169 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Housing Community Meetings
What is an Ideal Tenant? | December 7, 2022
Page 170 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meetings
Meeting #2 Page 1
MEETING AGENDA
Housing Community Meeting 2
What is an Ideal Tenant: Wednesday December 7th, 2022, 9:00 am – 11:00 am
PURPOSE
The Housing Community Meetings will assess stakeholder input and incorporate
recommendations in the City's proposed initiative in providing a voluntary Certified Safe
Housing Program to community members. The goal of these meetings is to identify clear
objectives and feasible incentives for voluntary participation.
DESIRED MEETING OUTCOMES
1. Get to know one another, establish trust
2. Confirm understanding of the City’s approach to code enforcement and safe housing
3. Share input, establish expectations
4. Recognize unique and diverse perspectives
5. Serve as a starting point for future focus groups
AGENDA
9:00am Coffee, light snacks served
9:10am Introductions: Michael Codron (5m) Mike Loew (5m)
The City’s Historic Approach to Tenant Education – Michael C.
Complexities of Moving into Rental Market from Out of State – Mike L.
9:20am Overview and Icebreaker: Austin (15m)
9:35am Divide into focus groups: Austin (5m)
9:40am Discussion in focus groups: Austin, John and Mike (50m)
10:30am Break (10m)
10:40am Closing Activity: Austin (5m)
10:45am Next Steps: Austin (5m)
10:50am Questions, feedback, departures (15m)
Page 171 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 2
HOUSING COMMUNITY MEETING OVERVIEW
9:20-9:35 am
WHO
A wide range of community stakeholders concerned about the rental housing community in
San Luis Obispo.
WHERE + WHEN
• Library Community Room on 12/7/22.
• One additional meeting in 2022 (Monday, December 12).
WHAT
The Housing Community Meetings will support the City of San Luis Obispo as it works to develop a
program centered around certifying residential rental units as Safe Housing. The Housing Community
Meetings will contribute to the success of these early phases and will support the implementation and
success of the program itself.
OBJECTIVES
• Develop trust and long-term relationships
• Learn from your experience working as stakeholder and issues in our community
• Learn about the opportunities and challenges of creating a voluntary certification program
• Collaboratively develop the foundation of the City’s proposed voluntary safe housing
certification program
• Incorporate feedback and discussion points into program planning
FOCUS GROUP MEETING AGREEMENTS
• Participate and share your ideas and opinions
• Voluntarily here, we need your participation
• Spark more discussion and gather your perspective
• To establish a program that helps achieve certified safe housing
• Practice active listening and avoid interrupting others
• Start and end meetings on time
Page 172 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 3
Focus Group Questions
9:40 – 10:30 am
1. How would you describe the rental market in San Luis Obispo?
a. What is your role in this market?
2. How do you currently interact with tenants in San Luis Obispo?
3. What are the most challenging aspects of renting property in San Luis Obispo?
4. What is your understanding of your rights as a landlord?
5. What are effective communication methods you utilize in reaching out to your tenants?
a. What method is the most effective?
6. Please define an ideal tenant in your own words?
a. What methods have you implemented to obtain "ideal" tenants if relevant
7. What actions or role do you see the City taking in assisting you finding the ideal tenant?
8. What actions or role do you see the City taking in assisting you with your current tenants?
9. Is there something more that you would like to see the City doing in regards to tenants or
prospective tenants other than what has already been discussed?
10. Would you consider providing City communication to your tenants?
a. If you answered no, why not consider providing communication to tenants?
11. What information, provided from the City, would you be comfortable relaying to your
tenants?
Potential types of information:
a. Tenant rights and responsibilities
b. Landlord rights and responsibilities
c. Safe housing regulations
d. Checklist of safe housing items
13. Open ended: In regards to what has been discussed, would you like to add anything else to
this discussion?
Page 173 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 4
CLOSING: HEAD, HEART, HANDS
10:40 - 10:45 am
QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK, DEPARTURES
10:50 – 11:00 am
CA TENANTS GUIDE
www.tinyurl.com/CATenants
(https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/California-Tenants-Guide.pdf)
Page 174 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Housing Community Meetings
How Should the City Administer This Proposed Program?
December 12, 2022
Page 175 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meetings
Meeting #2 Page 1
MEETING AGENDA
Housing Community Meeting 3
How Should City Administer: Monday December 12th, 2022, 9:00 am – 11:00 am
PURPOSE
The Housing Community Meetings will assess stakeholder input and incorporate
recommendations in the City's proposed initiative in providing a voluntary Certified Safe
Housing Program to community members. The goal of these meetings is to identify clear
objectives and feasible incentives for voluntary participation.
DESIRED MEETING OUTCOMES
1. Get to know one another, establish trust
2. Confirm understanding of the City’s approach to code enforcement and safe housing
3. Share input, establish expectations
4. Recognize unique and diverse perspectives
5. Serve as a starting point for future focus groups
AGENDA
9:00am Coffee, light snacks served
9:10am Introductions: John Mezzapesa (5m)
Professional Experience Being the Code Enforcement Supervisor and a Landlord –
John M.
9:15am Icebreaker: Austin (10m)
9:25am Divide into focus groups: Austin (5m)
9:30am Discussion in focus groups: Austin, John and Mike (60m)
10:30am Break (10m)
10:40am Next Steps: Austin (5m)
10:45am Questions, feedback, departures (15m)
Page 176 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 2
HOUSING COMMUNITY MEETING OVERVIEW
WHO
A wide range of community stakeholders concerned about the rental housing community in
San Luis Obispo.
WHERE + WHEN
• Library Community Room 12/12/22.
• Survey to be sent out to participants and other stakeholders
WHAT
The Housing Community Meetings will support the City of San Luis Obispo as it works to develop a
program centered around certifying residential rental units as Safe Housing. The Housing Community
Meetings will contribute to the success of these early phases and will support the implementation and
success of the program itself.
OBJECTIVES
• Develop trust and long-term relationships
• Learn from your experience working as stakeholder and issues in our community
• Learn about the opportunities and challenges of creating a voluntary certification program
• Collaboratively develop the foundation of the City’s proposed voluntary safe housing
certification program
• Incorporate feedback and discussion points into program planning
FOCUS GROUP MEETING AGREEMENTS
• Participate and share your ideas and opinions
• Voluntarily here, we need your participation
• Spark more discussion and gather your perspective
• To establish a program that helps achieve certified safe housing
• Practice active listening and avoid interrupting others
• Start and end meetings on time
Page 177 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 3
Focus Group Questions
9:30 – 10:30 am
1. What role would you say the City has in ensuring safe housing for rentals?
1. (In regards to the built environment.)
2. What is reasonable oversight in regards to what has been discussed? – How do you think
the City should administer ?
3. What means do you think the City should employ to carry out a Safe Housing Education and
Outreach Program?
4. What are some of your hesitations and concerns about the City's involvement in your rental
business?
1. How best could the City address your concerns and hesitations?
5. What would incentivize participation and engagement from you? / What would be of value to
your business in participating in a City administered safe housing program?
6. Considering that outreach and education is a directive for this program and that Building
and Safety is an inspection based division, what would be a reasonable approach for the
City to certify your rental property as "safe housing"? (Note: Any proposed inspections or
site visits would be voluntary and by request only.)
7. What issues might you foresee for a voluntary program of this type?
1. In what ways would you recommend the City address these issues?
8. What considerations and concerns would you like City staff to research for incorporation into
a safe housing certification program?
9. Would you consider being a part of a trial run for "safe housing" certification?
1. Please explain.
10. Open ended: In regards to what has been discussed, would you like to add anything else to
this discussion?
Page 178 of 182
City of San Luis Obispo, City Administration, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7114, slocity.org
City of San Luis Obispo Housing Community Meeting 2: What is an Ideal Tenant?
Meeting #2 Page 4
CLOSING: AFFIRMATION WHIP AND NEXT STEPS
10:40 - 10:45 am
QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK, DEPARTURES
10:45 – 11:00 am
CA TENANTS GUIDE
www.tinyurl.com/CATenants
(https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/California-Tenants-Guide.pdf)
CITY CODE ENFORCEMENT
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/code-enforcement
Page 179 of 182
Page 180 of 182
COM MUN IT Y DE VE LOPM E NT
Code Enforcement
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
93401 (805) 540-1581
code@slocity.org
SAFE & HEALTHY RENTAL HOUSING PROGRAM
•To make necessary or agreed-upon
repairs.
•First and subsequent waterbed installation
and inspections to ensure the installation
meets the law’s requirements.
•To show the rental unit to prospective
tenants, purchasers, lenders, or to provide
inspection before the end of tenancy.
•If directed by a court of law.
OWNER’S RIGHT TO ENTER &
TENANT RIGHTS
In most cases, the owner or property
manager must provide the tenant with prior
written notice to enter the tenant’s rental
home. Written notice is considered
reasonable if it is provided at least 24 hours
in advance. A written notice is required in the
following situations:
REQUEST A FIELD
INVEST IGATION
PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE
IS NOT REQUIRED IN THE
FOLLOWING SITUATIONS:
•In an emergency.
•Under consent of tenant or other legal
occupant(s).
•After tenant has abandoned or
surrendered the rental home.
•Upon verbal agreement to allow the
owner to make agreed-upon repairs, or
to supply services.
PERMITS ARE RE QUIRE D
FOR WORK SUCH AS :
•Electrical, plumbing or mechanical
alterations or additions.
•Structural additions or alterations
such as stairs, walls, and decks
requiring steps.
Safe Housing Staff is available to assist in
identifying and remedying deficiencies
related to rental housing. Requested
inspections will focus on those areas at the
requesting party’s direction. Identified
deficiencies will be documented and Safe
Housing Staff will collaborate with property
management or owners to facilitate
remediation of all deficiencies.
If Safe Housing Staff is unable to facilitate
remediation within a reasonable timeline,
remaining deficiencies may be forwarded as
violations to Code Enforcement Staff.
During inspection and/or consultations Safe
Housing Staff will provide tenants and
landlords guidance on applicable state and
local regulations related to safe housing as
well informational materials and safety
checklists.
Page 181 of 182
RETALIATION IS
AGAINST THE LAW
A rental owner or property manager may not evict or threaten to evict a tenant for exercising a legal right, such as requesting habitability repairs per Section 1942.5 of the California Civil Code. Tenants may protect their contractual rights by filing civil action.
•Maintain a clean and sanitary rental home.
•Properly dispose of garbage or trash.
•Properly operate all electrical, gas and plumbing
fixtures.
•
•
Refrain from damaging or defacing the home
or allowing anyone else to do so (tenants are
responsible for all repairs of damage caused by the
tenant, the tenant’s family, guests or pets).
Use the premises as a place to live, and use the
rooms for their intended purposes.
•
•
•
Report broken door or window locks.
Contact the owner or property manager immediately
to report any problems with your rental home—
especially any water damage or leaks.
Cooperate with repair workers/pest control
operators in preparing rental home for service or
repairs.
•Contact the owner or property manager first.
•Document your request in writing and keep a copy
if there is water intrusion, a leak, or any water
damage.
•
•
Allow a reasonable period of time for repair. Current
law indicates that 30 days is a reasonable period of
time to address most repairs, though the nature of
some repairs may require a longer timeframe.
Contact the City of San Luis Obispo Code
Enforcement to file a complaint if you have waited a
reasonable period of time, yet the requested repair
has not been made. Call (805) 540-1581 or email
code@slocity.org.
•Brief inspections ensuring health and safety
of rental units performed by city technician
•Checklist and feedback given to tenants for
the purpose of reporting issues to their
landlord/property managers
•Contact us at
SafeRentalProgram@slocity.org
TENANT RESPONSIBILITIES
MAINTENANCE &REPAIRS
Owners and property managers want to know if there
is an item in need of repair in your home. If you have
a problem with any of the items listed, you should:
There must be a permanently installed
heating source able to provide a room
temperature of 65ºF. Heating devices
must conform to applicable laws and
fuel-burning must be properly ventilated.
Roof, exterior walls, windows and doors
must prevent water leakage into living
areas; repairs must be permanent and
use accepted construction methods.
Roof, floors, walls, foundations and all
other structural components must be in
good condition and capable of providing
designed support.
Electrical systems shall be in good
working order and conform to applicable
law at the time of installation. Repairs
must be permanent and through
generally-accepted electrical methods.
Plumbing systems must be in safe and
sanitary condition, free of defects, leaks
and obstructions; repairs must be
permanent and use accepted plumbing
methods.
CA TENANTS GUIDE
Aguide to residential tenant's
and landlords' rights and responsibilities
https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/
California-Tenants-Guide.pdf
REQUEST A SAFETY INSPECTION Each unit must have an approved and
working smoke detector and carbon
monoxide detector installed and
maintained in accordance with
applicable codes.
Every dwelling unit must be maintained
free of rodents and other infestations.
Hot water system capable of producing
water of at least 110ºF.
Doors and windows must be in operable
condition and be equipped with working
locks.
Working toilet, wash basin, bathtub and/
or shower.
Kitchen with a working sink.
Safe fire or emergency exit.
Bathroom ventilation.
General maintenance - no major
cracking or missing pieces of counter
tops, vent screens, secure handrails,
maintained vegetation and paint.
Page 182 of 182
1
1.Receive a presentation on the current state of Code
Enforcement; and
2.Provide comments and direction to staff.
2
•Provide a divisional overview
•Provide a status report on Code Enforcement
•Provide an update on Code Enforcement's role in safe housing
•Provide forum for City Council discussion
Housing and
Homelessness
Economic Resiliency,
Cultural Vitality and
Fiscal Sustainability
Diversity, Equity, InclusionClimate Action, Open
Space & Sustainable
Transportation
3
4
WHAT IS CODE ENFORCEMENT?
"Code Enforcement is the prevention,
detection, investigation and enforcement of
violations of statutes or ordinances
regulating public health, safety, and welfare,
public works, business activities and
consumer protection, building standards,
land-use, or municipal affairs."
Program responsible for responding to
complaints regarding the enforcement of
designated ordinances relating to
regulations of health & safety codes,
building standards, zoning & land use
designations, property maintenance,
animals, substandard housing and other
miscellaneous regulations.
5
Finance &
Administration
Tax
Collection
Hiring &
Personnel
Election
Campaign
Public Works
Encroachme
nts
Public
Improveme
nts
Tree
Regulations
Parks &
Recreation
Park
Regulations
Open Space
Regulations
Utilities
Stormwater
Regulations
Illicit/Illegal
Discharge
Solid Waste
Disposal
Prohibited
Dumping
Community
Development
Building
Codes
Zoning
Regulations
Health &
Safety
Substandard
Housing
Public
Nuisances
Property
Maintenance
Fire
Fire Safety
Regulations
HAZMAT
Police
Public
safety
Health &
Welfare
6
7
8
Neighborhood Wellness Violations
Waste Containers Visible Storage Broken Fence Parking in Yard
9
Substandard Housing Violations
Infestation
Missing Smoke
Detector
Unpermitted Work Mold
Electrical Hazard
10
General Code Enforcement
Unpermitted
Construction
Animals Unpermitted Sign
11
•Response time by impact
•Key Performance Indicator
•Staffing levels affect
response time
12
13
Code Enforcement
Hotline
(805) 594-8188
Three
methods of
reporting
concerns
Phone/Email In person AskSLO
Code Enforcement
Email
code@slocity.org
14
15
Figure 2.1 - Code enforcement requests for past seven fiscal years
•65% Increase in
requests for three FY
prior to Covid-19
•AskSLO
•Reduced proactive
efforts
•New ordinances
16
Figure 2.4 - Code enforcement cases for past seven fiscal years
•Reactive cases
have decreased over time
•Proactive cases have
mostly remained consistent
17
Figure 2.3 - Isolated date ranges showing response rate based on staffing level.
18
•Building Inspection team also
responds to P1 violations
•Priority 4 violations are
easier to verify
•Substandard housing
complaints (P2) are
addressed expeditiously
19
Figure 3.1 – Requests for investigation dispositions
•83 Requests for
investigation
•65% of requests were
determined to be
unfounded or were
unable to be verified.
•35% of requests
resulted in confirmed
violations.
20
Safe Housing Education & Outreach
Rental Housing Inspection Program
Reactive Enforcement
•Evolution of Safe Housing
component over last eight years
•RHIP established in 2015
•RHIP repealed in 2017
•Following repeal - Council
direction to focus on
education/outreach NOT
voluntary inspection or self-
certification program.
21
Addition of Enforcement tools
•Increased fines
•Immediate issuance of fine for repeat violations
•Accrual of interest on unpaid fines
•Established procedure for recordation of Notice of Violations on title
Job Description
•Duties were rewritten to include administration of Safe Housing
Education and Outreach Program
Outreach to Property Managers
•Staff contacted all known Property Management companies to
discuss potential education and outreach opportunities
Educational Material
•Brochure created for landlords & tenants
•Webpage in progress dedicated to providing safe housing info
Focus Groups
•Three sessions completed with focus on:
•Dialogue regarding expectations of safe housing
•Discussion on how the city might obtain a high level of
participation regarding potential program improvements
22
A parent of a Cal Poly
Student submitted a
complaint regarding
mold
Staff connected the
students/parents with
Cal Poly off campus
coordinator
Staff initiated an
investigation by
conducting an
inspection
Landlord submitted
an air quality report to
city staff to dispute
claims of mold
Disputes between
Landlord and Parents
ensued
Students were
relocated to
temporary housing
through Cal Poly
resources
Staff worked with
landlord to ensure all
visable signs of mold
were remediated
23
www.slocity.org/housing
24
1.Is the program achieving the outcomes of the council and community?
2. What information can the Community Development Department provide
to help the community navigate the code enforcement process and
services?
3. What information would be most helpful to provide specifically for
landlords and tenants in the City?
4. Do you generally concur with the existing priority hierarchy of cases?
25
1.Receive a presentation on the current state of Code
Enforcement; and
2.Provide comments and direction to staff.
26
27
28
29
30
NSS RESPONSIBILITIES
Code Enforcement Technician I (Neighborhood Service Specialist)
Property Maintenance Standards (SLOMC 17.76)
•Front yard paving (SLOMC 17.76.030)
•Front yard parking (SLOMC 17.76.040)
•Fences/walls/hedge Maintenance (SLOMC
17.76.050)
•Neighborhood preservation (SLOMC 17.76.060)
•Abandoned buildings
•Paint and finish materials
•Structures and Machines
•Parking areas
•Vegetation
•Graffiti
•Violations of use permit or approval
•Public Nuisance
•Roofs (SLOMC 17.76.090)
•Screening (SLOMC 17.76.100)
International Property Maintenance Code (via SLOMC 15.02.010,
15.02.130)
•Vacant structures and land (IPMC 301.3)
•Inoperative vehicles (as seen from PROW) (IPMC 302.8)
•Premise ID (Address Numbers) (IPMC 304.3)
•Broken Windows (IPMC 304.13)
SLOMC Title 15
•Sign Regulations (SLOMC 15.40)
•Prohibited signs (SLOMC 15.40.300)
•Attention getting devices
•Banners
•Outdoor displays/off-site signs
•Sandwich board signs (SLOMC 15.40.470)
Other SLOMC regulations
•Shrubs/trees in public right-of-way (SLOMC 12.24.100)
•Encroachments (Basketball hoops) (SLOMC 12.04.020)
31
SHS RESPONSIBILITIES
2021 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC)
1997 Uniform Housing Code (UHC)
Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
CA Health & Safety Code
California Building Codes
•Building Code
•Residential Code
•Existing Building Code
•Fire Code
•Electrical Code
•Plumbing Code
•Mechanical Code
Code Enforcement Technician II (Safe Housing Specialist)
Education and Outreach
•Create opportunities for education for
rental unit stakeholders (Owners, tenants,
property management, realtors etc.)
▪Presentations
▪Educational materials
▪Checklists
▪Events
32
CEO RESPONSIBILITIES
SLOMC Title 6 - Animals
SLOMC Title 8 – Health and Safety
•Polystyrene
•Single-use straws
•Secondhand smoke control
•Offensive odors
SLOMC Title 9 – Public Peach, Morals and Welfare
•Cannabis regulations
•Noise control
•Cardroom
SLOMC Title 10 – Vehicles and Traffic
•Inoperative vehicles
SLOMC Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places
•Encroachments (Basketball hoops, fences)
•Stormwater (privately owned drainage
maintenance)
•Creek regulations (within private property)
•Tree regulations (vegetation growing into
PROW)
SLOMC Title 14 - Historic preservation ordinance
SLOMC Title 17 – Zoning regulations (cont.)
•Property Maintenance Standards (NSS Duties)
•Performance standards
•Air contaminants
•Discharges to sewer system
•Energy conservation
•Hazardous materials
•Heat & humidity
•Light & glare
•Noise
•Solid waste
•Vibration
•Specific Land Use Regulations
•Cannabis
•Convenience Stores
•Day Care
•Food Trucks
•Fraternities and Sororities
•Home occupation permit
•Homestay permit
•Household pets boarding kennels
•Outdoor sales on commercial and residential lots
•Recreational vehicles – use as dwelling on private lots
•Recycling facilities
•Safe parking
•Schools
•Service/fueling stations
•Vending machines
•Wireless telecommunication facilities
SLOMC Title 15 – Building and Construction
•Adoption & amendments of the following:
o 2021 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC)
o 1997 Uniform Housing Code (UHC)
o Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
o CA Health & Safety Code
o California Building Codes
o Building Code
o Residential Code
o Existing Building Code
o Fire Code
o Electrical Code
o Plumbing Code
Mechanical Code
SLOMC Title 17 – Zoning regulations
•Use regulations
•Setbacks/height regulations
•Creek setbacks
•Fences, walls, hedges
•Lighting and night sky preservation
•Vision clearance triangle at intersections
•Parking space requirements
•Uses requiring permits and violations of issued permits such
as:
•Use permits
•Planned development permit
•Architectural review approval
•Variance
•Development agreements
•Other land use permit
Code Enforcement Officer I/II
33
SWCEO RESPONSIBILITIES
SLOMC Title 12.08 – Urban Storm Water Quality
Management and Discharge Control
•Unlawful discharge into storm drain system
(SLOMC § 12.08.090)
•Unlawful connection to storm drain
system/publicly owned treatment works (POTW)
(SLOMC § 12.08.110)
•Unlawful deposit of waste/pollution (SLOMC §
12.08.120(A))
•Unlawful sidewalk cross drainage (SLOMC §
12.08.120(B))
•Failure to comply with NPDES permit (SLOMC §
12.08.140)
•Failure to comply with NPDES permit (SLOMC §
12.08.140)
Stormwater Code Enforcement Officer
SLOMC Title 12.08 (cont.)
•Failure to maintain premises, Prevention
of pollutants (SLOMC § 12.08.160(A))
•Failure to maintain adequate BMPs at
construction sites (SLOMC §
12.08.160(B))
•Failure to maintain waterway on private
property (SLOMC § 12.08.170(A))
•Failure to maintain private structures
near waterways (SLOMC § 12.08.170(B)
•Performance of maintenance causing
adverse impact to waterway species
(SLOMC § 12.08.170(C))
•Failure to comply with federal/state
agencies (SLOMC § 12.08.170(C))
34
Landlord/Tenant
Tenant/Tenant
Neighbors
Family
Discrimination
35
Tenant A in a dispute
with Tenant B
Tenant A places
items belonging to
Tenant B in front
yard.
Initial request
received regarding
visible storage of
washer/dryer and
furniture in the front
yard.
Inspection confirmed
violation. NOV was
sent to Property
Owner.
Tenant A would not
allow Property
Owner to correct
violation.
Property Owner filed
for eviction of Tenant
A for violation of
lease.
An additional request
for investigation
received from Tenant
A regarding
substandard housing
conditions.
Inspection
determined minor
electrical and
plumbing alterations
had occurred.
NOV was sent to
Property Owner.
Tenants A & B
refused Property
owner entry.
Compliance date
extended to allow
Property Owner time
to complete eviction
process.
Tenant A blocked
plumbing of kitchen
sink and contacted
Code Enforcement
again. Inspection
confirmed violation.
Case
Study
36
37
38