HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/07/1992, 2 - NUISANCE ABATEMENT - LOUD OR UNRULY ASSEMBLAGES MEETING AGENDA
111 M111V" 1 city of San 1�.� OBISpo TE 4`Z, ITEM #
i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM: James M. Gardiner, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Nuisance Abatement — Loud or Unruly Assemblages
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce ordinance amending Chapter 6.24 Nuisance Abatement to designate loud or
unruly assemblages and unlawful encroachments as nuisances, provide for criminal
sanctions for maintaining a nuisance,and provide a private cause of action for maintaining
a nuisance.
BACKGROUND:
One of the major demands on police services continues to be response to noise disturbances. We
have seen the number of complaints continue to rise annually from 1,696 in 1987 to 2,540 in 1991.
This continual increase comes despite the coordinated efforts of the City, University and College
administrations, the Student/Community Liaison Committee, and other student and community
groups to deal with this problem. These efforts have included:
Education- Continual educational efforts by University and College officials,the S.LO.
Police Department,the Community Development Department,and student
groups.
Regulation- Revision of the Noise Ordinance
Adoption of the Second Response Ordinance _
Adoption of the High Occupancy Ordinance
Enforcement-Increased citations for noise violations
Billing for second response fees
Strict enforcement of Uniform Housing Code
While we have seen more awareness of the problem,the efforts to this point have not stemmed or
reversed the situation. The problem is becoming increasingly acute in lower density
neighborhoods. In 1991 nearly two-thirds of noise complaints came from the R-1 and R-2 zones.
The Community Development Department's best estimate is that over 30%of the dwellings in the
R-1 and R-2 zones are now rentals. Although there is no specific data available,it is apparent from
responses in these areas that there is a correlation between the increased number of rental
properties and the increase in complaints. This observation is based on contacts with
neighborhood residents, local realtors, and police officers.
It has been well established in law that the owner of a property accepts responsibility for uses or
conditions on that property. The current abatement ordinance identifies some types of activities
or conditions which are considered detrimental to the general public. It has also been established
that censurable conduct occurring at a location may give cause to notice the property owner to
abate that conduct Failure to do so can subject the owner to civil and criminal penalties. Our
current abatement ordinance does not identify disruptive conduct nor does it provide for criminal
penalties. We believethatthe Nuisance Abatement Ordinance should be amended to include both
provisions.
1
a!�
11101111P,11y city of san Luis oi3ispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DISCUSSION:
Lice any other detrimental use or condition,loud or unruly assemblages have a substantial negative
impact on the immediate neighborhood. Problem properties result in a deterioration in the general
standard of living and have a potential to reduce the properly values in the area. It also decreases
the overall public safety when police resources are required to deal with continual responses to
problem locations.
After several years of looking at this problem, it appears that the one °untapped° resource In
reducing these kinds of problems is the property owner. It has been our experience that where
property owners take a strong, active responsibirdy for their property, we have fewer problems.
Where the owner fags to set clear lease expectations or fails to respond to concerns from adjoining
neighbors,we have more frequent and confrontational responses. It has also been our experience
that the properties which require frequent responses are often in violation of other health or safety
codes.
In researching the impacts of the proposed amendments,responses from concerned parties were
consistent with their side of the issue. Universally, however, everyone agreed that there was a
problem and that it was not getting better. Neighbors raring next to problem properties expressed
their ftstration with the situation and the general lack of responsiveness from property owners.
Representatives for property owners felt that while they should take some action with problem
tenants, the representatives did not feel that they should be held responsible for their tenants
actions. Reasons given for failure to take action generally centered around the cost of evictions,
the length of the process,or the concern that the property would be damaged if the owner began
the process. After.these discussions it was clear that short of some requirement to take action,
property owners have no incentive or disincentive to deal with these problems as long as the rent
is being paid.
The primary reason given by property owners for failure to support this ordinance is that they do
not feel they should be responsible for the actions of another person. For the most part, they
acknowledge that unsafe or injurious conditions onthe properly arethe owners responsibility,even
N caused by the tenants. It is our position that the kinds of continual disturbances described in the
ordinance have a similar negative impact on a neighborhood and the general public. These
disturbances destroy the peace of the area and tie up valuable public safety resources. As the
benefactor,the property owner should accept the same level of responsibility for this nuisance as
any other. This is particularly true when the property is a residential rental.
The City has long taken the position that reasonable regulation of business is appropriate in the
public interest We have also held business owners responsible for the manner in which the
business is operated and the conduct of patrons. The City's smoking and noise ordinances were
both adopted to protectthe general public. From a policy standpoint,the City has recognized that
a residential property used as a rental is a business. A business license is now required for these
properties. We believe that it is reasonable to apply these same principles to the operation of a
residential rental business.
2
a-a
i city of san Ums oBispo
Maize COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Ordinance Enforcement
As previously stated,the Police Department responded to over 2,500 noise complaints in 1991. To
assess the impact of the proposed ordinance, the proposed standards were applied. Even with
the limited exposure of a sixty day period, 129 locations had two or more "responses." Of these
locations,59 fall into the three or more category and,without appropriate action,would have been
considered for the abatement process.
The primary purpose of this recommended action is to encourage property owners to take an
active,responsible role in management of their property. This would include clear lease conditions
regarding conduct of tenants and quick,responsive action when problem tenants or conditions are
identified.
The specific recommended amendments to the ordinance include:
A. Loud or Unruly Assemblages
Application:
The ordinance applies to separate occupancies. A single family home would be
treated as one occupancy. Individual units in multiple unit structures will be deemed
separate occupancies.Therefore,the ordinance would be applied against individual
units, not the entire housing or business complex
Response Criteria
As applied to the ordinance, the determination of a "response" will be when the
Police Department responds to a location,observes a violation of applicable State
or Municipal violations, and the tenant is issued a Disturbance Advisement Card, a
citation,or is arrested for the applicable violation. Verbal warnings and unfounded
calls do not constitute a response.
Notification:
i
As written, a property may be declared a nuisance when there is an occurrence of
"... more than two (2) loud or unruly assemblages in any sixty (60) day period ..."
In order to notify property owners,the Police Departmentwill send a registered letter
to the property owner upon the occurrence of a second response in a sixty day
period.
Abatement Enforcement:
It will be the policy of the Chief of Police, the City Attorney, and the Community
Development Director to work constructively with the property owner(s),tenant(s),
and concerned neighbor(s)when a problem property is identified. While each case
will have its own set of facts,we will work with the involved parties to assure that the
problems are rectified. Actual abatement and any subsequent criminal prosecution
will be considered only when all other reasonable efforts have not abated the
3'
- a-3
djgW,� city of San LL,-a' OBISp0
in COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
problem. The attached Operations Directive detailstheintent and procedureswhich
will be utilized in enforcement of the ordinance. (Attachment #3)
B. Unlawful Encroachments
The language regarding encroachment is added to strengthen and clarify the city's current
procedures concerning illegal encroachments.
C. Private Cause of Action
The language regarding private cause of action is added to strengthen the existing civil
remedies available to citizens who have suffered damages or require injunctive relief from
nuisances as defined in the ordinance.
Foryour convenience a legislative draft has been included as Attachment#2to clearly show
the proposed amendments to the current nuisance abatement provisions of the Municipal
Code.
CONCURRENCES:
Input for this ordinance was sought from the Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RON), the
Student/Community Liaison Committee (SCLC), the Off Campus Student Housing Association
(OCSHA), the Association of Realtors, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Property Owners'
Association. Letters of support from the RON and OCSHA are Attachments #5 and #6
respectively. By motion, the SCLC supported the ordinance in principle.
The Association of Realtors has taken a position opposing the ordinance. While acknowledging
the problem,they use the rental car analogy (See Attachment#7). Using the same example,the
rental car agency would be liable If they rented to an unlicensed driver or one who was obviously
intoxicated. As the Police Department will be notifying the property owner when there is a problem,
we believe that this responsibility,should appy. The Association has indicated a willingness to
assist as a resource in appropriate situations.
A presentation was also made to the Chamber of Commerce Issues Evaluation committee. After
discussion,and at the time of this report,the committee has taken no position. They may choose
to support the position presented by another Association.
The Property Owners' Association has provided three position papers which are included as
attachment Their primary position is in opposition to the ordinance. .While much time has been
spent discussing specific questions in their position papers, it is still staffs position that the
ordinance is valid and necessary. In response to their concerns,we did provide a more specific
definition of what constitutes a°response°. Additionally, the draft Police Department Operations
Directive was revised to better document property owner notification and further emphasize
cooperative efforts to remediate problem locations before having to resort to the full abatement
process.
_. 4
�.s OBISPO
TrAlcity of san L.
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no immediate fiscal impacts for the City. Staff work required can be handled by existing
personnel.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Modify response criteria for loud or unruly assemblages.
If the number of responses were increased or time frame reduced, fewer locations would
be subject to abatement If the number of responses were reduced or the time frame
extended, more locations could be subject to abatement
2 Do nothing.
The Department would continue working with existing policies, ordinances, and affected
groups to try and deal with his problem.
SUMMARY:
Two of the primary reasons for local government are the protection of the public and the
preservation of the general peace and tranquility of the community. There is a real and valid
expectation on the part of community residents that government will establish reasonable-
regulations with appropriate enforcement to achieve these goals. The proposed ordinance
provides the City and affected citizens with effective remedies to deal with a continuing problem in
our community. The interests of the property owner are protected by collaborative enforcement
policies and the safeguards of the procedural process through the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment#1: Proposed Ordinance
Attachment#2 Legislative Draft of Ordinance
Attachment#3: Draft Police Department Operations Directive
Attachment#4: Five Year History of Noise Complaints
Attachment#5: Letter from Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
Attachment#8: Letter from Off Campus Student Housing Association
Attachment#7: Letter from SLO Association of Realtors
Attachment#8: Letter from SLO Property Owners'Association
5
�-5
ORDINANCE N0. (1991 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.24 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING NUISANCE ABATEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo, pursuant to its Charter
and the constitutional and statutory laws of the State of
California, is authorized to abate public nuisances and assess the
cost of abatement against the parcel on which the nuisance exists;
and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo is further authorized to
impose criminal sanctions for maintenance of a public nuisance;
and
WHEREAS, a public nuisance causes, or may cause, one or all
of the following adverse conditions:
1. A reduction in property value;
2. An obstruction to or interference with comfortable
enjoyment of adjacent property and the general community;
3. Adverse impacts on the aesthetic quality of property,
giving the appearance of blighted conditions and a
deteriorated environment; and
4. Conditions which are injurious to the public health,
safety and general welfare including, but not limited to,
a harborage for rodents and insects, a dangerous
attraction for children, potential ' for fire and health
hazards, and noise and disruption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 8. 24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
is hereby amendbd as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A",
incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. A synopsis of this ordinance, approved by the
City Attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published
once in full, at least five • (5) days prior to its final passage,
in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in
said city, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of
thirty (30) days after its said final passage. A copy of the full
text of this ordinance shall be on file in the office of the City
Clerk on and after the date following introduction and passage to
print and shall be available to any interested member of the
public.
On motion of seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
a-�
Ordinance No. (1991 Series)
Page Two
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing ordinance was introduced to print this day of
1991.
Mayor Ron Dunin
ATTEST:
City Clerk, Pam Voges
APPROVED:
Cit Admin strat ve Officer
t r
slc� � -
ol 'c Chief
Community Devel ment Director
a-7
FTT A
Chapter 8.24
NUISANCE ABATEMENT
Sections:
8.24.010 Title.
8.24.020 Public nuisances designated.
8.24.030 Abatement methods.
8.24.040 Resolution setting public hearing.
8.24.050 Posting notice of public hearing.
8.24.060 Serving notice of public hearing.
8.24.070 Notice-- Proof of posting and service.
8.24.080 Hearing by council.
8.24.090 Hearing-- Council's determination.
8.24.100 Time limitation for filing objections to council' s
determination.
8.24.110 Resolution order abatement -- Service and
recordation.
8.24.120 Abatement by City.
8.24.130 Statement of abatement costs.
8.24.140 Confirmation of statement of abatement costs.
8.24.150 Assessment of costs--Notice of lien--Collection.
8.24.160 Prohibited acts.
8.24.170 Alternative methods of abatement or enforcement.
8.24.180 Maintaining a nuisance--Criminal sanctions.
8.24.190 Maintaining a nuisance--Private cause of action.
8.24.200 Severability
8.24.010—Title. - - - _--- -- -- - --- ------- - .
This chapter may be cited as the "nuisance abatement 'ordinance
of the city. " (Prior code § 4400)
8.24.020 Public nuisances designated.
Each of the following shall constitute a public nuisance which
may, at the sole discretion of the city, be abated in accordance
with the abatement procedures set forth in this chapter. In
addition, criminal sanctions may be imposed for the maintenance of
a public nuisance as set forth in section 8.24. 180 of this Chapter.
A. Any structure, as defined in the building code, which
exists, . or which is maintained or used upon any premises in
violation of any requirement or prohibition of any law, ordinance
or permit, including, without limitation, requirements or
prohibitions related to location, construction, condition,
maintenance, use, occupancy or time period limitation;
B. Any premises upon which there exists any. condition,- thing,
occupancy or use in violation of any requirement or prohibition of
any law, ordinance or permit related to the condition, maintenance,
occupancy or use of the premises;
- 1
ATTACHMENT 1
C. Any unlawful encroachment which obstructs or interferes
with the free passage or use by the public of any public sidewalk,
street, alley or right of way.
D. The occurrence of more than two (2) loud or unruly
assemblages in any sixty (60) day period that threatens the public
peace, health, safety or general welfare and requires a police
response to control the threat to the public peace, health, safety,
or general welfare. The determination of a public nuisance under
this subsection shall expire eighteen (18) months after the date
of the resolution ordering abatement as set forth in Section
8.24. 110 of this Chapter.
E. As applied to the ordinance, the determination of a
"response" will be when the Police Department responds to a
location, observes a violation of applicable State or Municipal
violations, and the tenant is issued a Disturbance Advisement Card,
a citation, or is arrested for the applicable violation.
F. Anything constituting a public nuisance as specifically
defined or declared by any other law or ordinance.
8.24.030 Abatement methods:
Public nuisances ordered to be abated under the provisions of
this chapter may be abated by rehabilitation, repair, demolition,
removal or other appropriate action as determined by the council
after compliance by the city with the procedures set forth in this
- -- chapter:— (Prior code- g- 4400-.2)----
8.24.040
400:2)— -8.24.040 Resolution setting public hearing.
A. Whenever the council finds, based upon the recommendations
of the city administrative officer or any department head, that a
public nuisance may exist upon any premises, the council may, by
resolution, declare its intent to hold a public hearing to
ascertain whether the same constitutes a public nuisance which may
be abated under the procedure set forth in this chapter.
B. The resolution shall describe the premises by street
address, referring to the street by the name under which it is
officially or commonly known, shall further describe the property
by giving the lot, block and tract number thereof where applicable
and the parcel number from the assessment roll, shall give a brief
description of the facts forming the basis for the finding, and
shall contain a brief statement of the possible methods available
to abate the alleged nuisance.
8.24.050 Posting notice of public hearing.
Within thirty days after the passage of the resolution and at
least fifteen days before the time fixed for the public hearing,
2
the city clerk shall cause to be conspicuously posted on the
premises a certified copy of such resolution, and a notice of the
time and place of hearing before the council, which notice shall
be titled, "Notice of Public Hearing" in letters not less than one
inch in height and shall be substantially in the following form:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO DETERMINE EXISTENCE OF
PUBLIC NUISANCE AND TO ABATE
IN WHOLE OR PART
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on (date) at
the hour of .M. , the Council of the City of
San Luis Obispo will hold a public hearing in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, to ascertain whether a public nuisance exists
upon certain premises situated in said City known and
designated as
(street .address) and more particularly
described as Lot No. , Block No. , Tract No._
, and shown as Parcel No. in
Book , Page in the assessment roll
of the County of san Luis Obispo.
If the Council finds upon the evidence presented at
the hearing that a public nuisance does exist, and if the
same is not promptly abated by the owner of said
premises, said nuisance may be abated by municipal
-- — authorities-- by- - rehabilitation, repair, demolition,---- - -- - -
removal or other appropriate action, the cost of which
will constitute a lien upon such premises until paid.
In addition, the owner may be subject to criminal
sanctions for the maintenance of a public nuisance as set
forth in San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 8. 24. 180.
The alleged nuisance consists of the following:_
All persons having any objection to, or interest in.
said matters are hereby notified to appear at the public
hearing at the aforesaid time and place, when their
testimony and evidence will be heard and given due
consideration.
Dated:
City Clerk
(Prior code § 4400.4)
3
• a-�o
8.24.060 serving notice of public hearing.
A. At least fifteen days before the time fixed for the public
hearing, the city clerk shall cause to be served upon each of the
owners thereof one copy of the notice of public hearing and a
certified copy of the resolution of the council. "Owner" as used
in^ this chapter shall mean any person known to be in possession and
also any person having any legal or equitable interest in the
premises as disclosed by a current title search from an accredited
title company.
B. Service shall be by personal service- upon any owner whose
name and address appears upon the last equalized assessment roll
and who can reasonably be found within the city limits. Service
upon all other owners may be accomplished by depositing a stamped,
sealed envelope containing a copy of the notice and resolution in
the .U.S. Certified or Registered Mail, return receipt requested,
addressed to each owner at his last known address; and if there is
no known address, then in care of the address of the premises.
Service shall be deemed to be complete at the time of such deposit.
The failure of any person to receive such notice shall not affect
the validity of the abatement proceedings: (Prior code § 4400.5)
8.24.070 Notice--Proof of posting and service.
Before the commencement of the public hearing, the city clerk
shall verify that affidavits or declarations establishing proof of
posting of the premises and proof of service upon- all- owners within -
the required time periods have been filed in his office. (Prior
code § 4400.6)
8.24.080 Hearing by council.
At the time stated in the notice, the city council shall hear
and consider all relevant evidence, objections or protests, and
shall receive testimony under oath from owners, witnesses, city
personnel and interested persons relative to the existence of the
alleged public nuisance, the estimated costs of abating the same,
and any other matters which the council deems pertinent thereto.
The hearing may be continued from time to time by the council.
(Prior code § 4400.7)
8.24.090 Heariag--Councills determination.
A. After the conclusion of the hearing, the council shall,
based upon the hearing, determine whether or not a pubic nuisance
exists upon the premises, or any part thereof.
B. If the council finds that such public nuisance does exist
and that there is sufficient cause to require the abatement
thereof, the council may adopt a resolution declaring the existence
4
of the nuisance upon the premises, and ordering the abatement of
the same within thirty days, or within such other tine limit as the
council may specify, by the manner and means specifically set forth
in the resolution. (Prior code § 4400. 8)
8.24.100 Time limitation for filing objections to council' s
determination.
Any owner or other interested person having any objections or
feeling aggrieved at any proceeding taken by the council in
ordering the abatement of any public nuisance under the provisions
of this chapter must bring an action to contest such decision
within thirty days after the adoption by the council of the
resolution ordering the abatement of the nuisance. otherwise, all
objections to such decision shall be deemed waived. (Prior code
§ 4400.9)
8.24.110 Resolution order.jCgf abatement--Service and recordation.
A copy of the resolution ordering the abatement of the
nuisance shall be served upon the owners of the property in
accordance with the provisions of Section 8.24.060. Any property
owner shall .have the right to have any such premises rehabilitated
or to have such structures demolished, removed or repaired in
accordance with the resolution, at his own expense, provided the
same is done prior to the expiration of the time limit specified
in the resolution. Upon such abatement in full by the owner,
proceedings under this chapter shall terminate. If the nuisance
- has- not- been- abated as ordered within the specified- time- limit, the
city clerk shall file in the office of the recorder of the county
a certificate describing the property and certifying (1) that the
property is a public nuisance and (2) that the owner has been so
notified. Whenever thereafter the public nuisance has been abated
as ordered, the city clerk shall file a new certificate with the
county recorder certifying that the property is no longer a public
nuisance. (Prior code § 4400. 10)
8.24.120 Abatement by City.
If such nuisance is not completely abated by the owner within
the time limit specified by the council, the council may direct the
city administrative officer, or such other city official as may be
designated by him, to cause the same to be abated by city forces
or private contract, and city and contract personnel are expressly
authorized to enter upon the premises for such purpose. Upon
request of the designated official, other city departments shall
cooperate fully and shall render all reasonable assistance in
abating any such nuisance. (Prior code § 4400. 11)
5
8.24.130 Statement of abatement costs.
A. The city administrative officer shall keep an account of
the costs incurred by the city in abating the nuisance; and shall
submit to the council an itemized statement for each lot or parcel
showing all such costs, including incidental expenses, and noting
any salvage value or storage costs of items removed .from the
property; provided, that before the statement is considered by the
council, a copy of the same shall be posted for at least five days
upon such lot or parcel, together with a notice of the time and
place when the statement will be considered by the council for
confirmation. A copy of the statement and notice shall also be
served upon the owners of the lot or parcel in the manner provided
in Section 8.24.060 for serving the . notice of public hearing;
provided, that the date of service must. be at least prior to the
date the council considers the statement. Proof of the posting and
service shall be accomplished as provided in Section 8.24 . 070.
B. The term "incidental expenses" shall include, but not be
limited to, the actual expenses and costs of the city in obtaining
title reports, in the preparation and service of notices,
preparation of specifications, the preparation and award of all
contracts, all costs of inspecting any work done pursuant to this
chapter, the cost of printing and mailing required under this
chapter, the costs f preparing materials for any hearing held
pursuant to this chapter, and a reasonable additional sum to cover
the cost of. administrative overhead. (Prior code § 4400.12)
8.24.140-- Confirmation- of statement of abatement costs. -- -
At the time and place for considering the .statement, the
council shall consider the statement together with any objections
or protests thereto by the owners or other interested persons. The
decision of the council on all protests shall be final and
conclusive, and the council may approve the statement as submitted,
or may modify it as the council deems just and equitable.
Thereafter, the council shall adopt a resolution confirming the
statement as submitted or as modified. (Prior code § 4400. 13)
8.24.150 Assessment of costs--Notice of lien--Collection.
A. Both the owner of the property on which the nuisance was
abated and all persons who created, caused, committed or maintained
the nuisance shall be personally liable to the city for the
abatement costs confirmed by the resolution. In addition, the
abatement costs shall constitute a special assessment against the
respective lot or parcel of land to which it relates, and upon
recordation in the office of the county recorder of a notice of
lien, shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of
such assessment.
6
_n [ :a
B. The form for the notice of lien shall be substantially
as follows:
NOTICE OF LIEN
(Claim of City of San Luis Obispo)
Pursuant to the authority granted. by the laws of the
State of California and the Charter and ordinances of the
City of San Luis Obispo, and in compliance with the
provisions thereof, said City has expended the sum of
$ to abate a public nuisance upon
the hereinafter described real property, the City Council
of said City has adopted- Resolution No.
confirming said sum as the cost of abatement, and said
sum now constitutes a special assessment and lien upon
said real property until said sum has been paid in full
and discharged of record.
Said real property is situated within the City of san
Luis Obispo, County of san Luis Obispo, State of
California, more particularly described as follows:
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
Dated: , 19 .
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
C. After recordation, a certified copy of the notice of lien
shall be delivered to the tax collector and thereafter the amount
of the lien shall be collected at the same time and in the same
manner as ordinary municipal taxes are collected and shall be
subject to the same penalties and the same procedure under
foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency as provided for
ordinary municipal taxes, or, after such recordation, such lien may
be fore closed by judicial or other sale in the manner and means
provided by law. (Prior code § 4400. 14)
8.24.160 Prohibited acts.
A. It is unlawful for any person to remove, deface or
mutilate any notice, order, statement or resolution posted as
required in this chapter.
B. It. is unlawful for any person to obstruct, impede or
interfere with any owner or his agent or with any representative
7
of the city when engaged in performing any act reasonably necessary
for the execution of the order of abatement. (Prior code §
4400.15)
8.24.170 Alternative methods of abatement or enforcement.
Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed or construed to
prevent the city from commencing any civil or criminal proceedings
otherwise authorized by law for the declaration or abatement of a
nuisance or for the prosecution of a criminal offense which may
also constitute a nuisance. The procedures provided in this
Chapter shall be cumulative and shall not prevent concurrent or
consecutive procedures provided in this Chapter, . the San Luis
Obispo Municipal Code or by state law for the abatement of a public
nuisance. Abatement of a public nuisance or imposition of criminal
sanctions under this. Chapter shall not prejudice or affect any
other civil or criminal action or remedy for the maintenance of a
public nuisance.
8.24.180 Maintaining a nuisance--Criminal sanctions.
If the owner of any premises fails or neglects to remove or
otherwise take action to abate the public nuisance, as herein
defined, within the time specified in this Chapter, the owner of
the premises shall be guilty of an infraction for maintenance of
such public nuisance. However, a third or subsequent violation of
this Chapter within a period of one (1) year shall be a
misdemeanor. Each and every day any such public nuisance exists
constitutes a- separate offense:- The violations shall- be punishable---
as set forth in Chapter 1. 12 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
8.24.190 Maintaining a nuisance--Private cause of action.
If the owner of any premises fails or neglects to remove or
otherwise take action to abate the public nuisance, as herein
defined, any aggrieved person may, in addition to any other right
or remedy they may possess either at law or in equity, bring a
civil action against the owner for damages or injunctive relief
for the maintenance of a public nuisance. The court may award the
prevailing party in such action the costs of litigation, including
reasonable attorney's fees Actions under this section must be
filed within one (1) year of the act or condition giving rise to
a public nuisance.
8.24.200 Severability.
If any part or provision of this chapter or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, then the
remainder of the chapter, including the application of such part
8
or provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be
affected thereby and shall• continue in full force and effect. To
this end, provisions of this chapter, in whole and in part, are
severable.
9
ORDINANCE NO. (1991 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.24 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING NUISANCE ABATEMENT
On , the San Luis Obispo City Council
voted to to introduce Ordinance No.
(1991 Series) , which amended Chapter 8.24 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code regarding nuisance abatement.
The primary amendments to Chapter 8.24 include: (1) the
designation of unlawful encroachments and certain loud or unruly
assemblages as nuisances; (2) the addition of criminal sanctions
for maintaining a nuisance; and (3) the creation of a private cause
of action for maintaining a nuisance.
The Council must vote again to approve the ordinance before
it can take effect. That action is tentatively scheduled for _
(date) at a regular City Council meeting to begin at 7: 00
p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street.
Copies of the complete ordinance are available in the City
Clerk's Office in Room #1 of City Hall, 990 Palm Street. For more
information, contact the San Luis Obispo Police Department at 781-
7312.
x147
Chapter 8.24
NUISANCE ABATEMENT
Sections:
8.24.010 Title.
8.24.020 Public nuisances designated.
8.24.030 Abatement methods.
8.24.040 Resolution setting public hearing.
8.24.050 Posting notice of public hearing.
8.24.060 Serving notice of public hearing.
8.24.070 Notice-- Proof of posting and service.
8.24.080 Hearing by council.
8.24.090 Hearing-- Councills determination.
8.24.100 Time limitation for filing objections to council's
determination.
8.24.110 Resolution order abatement -- Service and
recordation.
8.24.120 Abatement by City.
8.24.130 Statement of abatement costs.
8.24.140 Confirmation of statement of abatement costs.
8.24.150 Assessment of costs--Notice of lien--Collection.
8.24.160 Prohibited acts.
8.24.170 Alternative methods of abatement or enforcement.
t.vt tx r:{.tt.:.s;!"s .t ???::iic:.." { > a o, n +c •f y t o ....
8<���[.39:����l�a�nta�Axi��'}•`a�°,nu�}sa�ce -�z#,v�te cayse� +off aa��:"auf;
8.24.010 Title.'_..
This chapter may be cited as the "nuisance abatement ordinance
of the city. " (Prior code § 4400)
8.24.020 Public nuisances designated.
Each of the following shall constitute a public nuisance which
may, at the sole discretion of the city, be abated in accordance
with the abatement procedures set forth in this chapter. 1
A. Any structure, as defined in the building code, which
exists, or which is maintained or used upon any premises in
violation of any requirement or prohibition of any law, ordinance
or permit, including, without limitation, requirements or
prohibitions related to location, construction, condition,
maintenance, use, � c or time period limitation;
B. Any premises upon which there exists any condition, thing,
t or use in violation of any requirement or prohibition of
any law, ordinance or permit related to the condition, maintenance,
�w
or use of the premises;
1
ATTACHMENT 2 ^ _'�
......xa'., v,.+.... ..:n.:n.+:t:t..v:nra+r+.............+.a..:.•::.n•., ,...:;:.::„•
.2. t.:........._...
.:.: .:..:... ......... ..:.:i::+.... .,,:...�: Si�.'.::+.`x.:v.ya¢..w+m;,.:_4, ::,a,.:.;::`isf:c,:;4.�a..;:•:..:::...v:;.•..:4x.::.+;
C. Vin: unattfu +:'.:encrvach�nei w1�sc4 a3�sti^ tets:.•.or an rferes
:. .. . ..�.} }/'.j ,..;.,.::.i'..:......,.........., . :r: ;« '. >�: .<>.
. :� `..... AI..... +'..: s{�1� 1�I.' ti/�F Mtrrt4 RI�/ •:I#::uM V�: N ,� u z � � 4e.W � A.
st�+e�tt :4 a�.3e ar�tyj..zQht:o�:>�t�•Y+'.t
T.:w.IXIX: ^:#vJL 94h+SF IX4SW'r�On4Nxf:Nii.�(vHWF7vm: .4me: :xFi?„w]R:•,L:
....yvn,•xxtm...,�: :.y.,xvx.: ,•::x:nx .:x, „vx.•nv:.„v.vnyx,.v.y:: vx
"4x td+i;ni; tnx::":...... ,y: :iu:l...t...:...r4.:::::+.,e':,..:'
.h,..,.
.:.........::o:is '
::...n.. tr.;;y, ..
.x...
:>:>::»»' e.::::..oc. r:�eh. . re<:..... c:<>=:<>::<2;: €<;<'>o. °<':or> >znru'� :
C:i::!!^iiia."::::::i::::::i:i:::.. .:.
.av : .n::.•ti: ..:n..........n.... :0iii:.i''iiii:.iiii i::..i'v,v:v:.... •••••••••�: ::•!!•i
,.x. .v.vn. .. .... .. k... .. ... .. :::!!!. i'::i:.iy::i:::!.�:i'::.i'i`i::i'�':i i::....:.4:::i:`:i'.i:n:j'i:..:.'.ii:iii:.isi::.:+::}:isisisi:::ii::}i.'::is�i'a::i }'.:i}:} :::!::!.::is
' lgllx:..i < d :a: >n:i t r. ate s::;<;. e<:: u : c
.,::.::: .:. a.::. .G.t3 ......a r....ad:: ::::.: ..::::: .n..... :�. :.
:.::..:. ::::..::....iiix<::<..i.ii:t:::..:::.,..:::.i.. .::.i. .x.ist:.i.::,:. .>.. :::;:::t..:.>::.i:..:,;.:,::. i:.:<.i.a..i.:;::.::.:..i..;... .:.::....i.:« '.i
Sea�e, ieat2sR safety. ort general wel#ark and regtiares a police
se<to r zit rail t3�e threat to tea pub3 pe.a e, ...... safety,::
greczarai }.jW.j{€ e:�te33yC�ye�ja`�inyaJ ��oy�s'a$paaJtu„b ���+r yn�{�syaTnce` un}de
� t+` �4i �V,y�.'�r�fykw 'Rt�+` r�pIw G•* Si�r ��lG�li iV 'ylli# P 5��ir�Mf1� � 11
the f'2sdlut bx ` t c eran ab..... alt. < s s t ° Fol Ch i S4•CCinn
hwm�'ivw.v,.v.vv.FtR,wmvr v.,,w.,+vxwav',.vnv:.,w:hh
tFvn . :” .".�( » C4 7:....,,t...... ...3.1a....t#... :�4?..:..i ._.t7a.,t ��1:ia �3:�A:1'Y><`;.'O�
..:....au::4.....k............++N4u.,4x�::..»:..:.i..iMx•.i:.s:t•:4:o:i•>:tt„.;:.,::.n.:..y::::i:4::»:.ii6:;....n%i.:........h'
..st.:::n.nn .n..,. :,:.:.' .;4 .,;n..to.>:,},.`.:t. .. ...yn:4:.i:>;{....:i:;;:•.ii s.::::.;+:..:r.A: :.::....;.,y:,:.:.....:,::i:.,}'::;.,i;:y::..,.:.i::....r.i,:n..t;. :. •:i::5
:�_>nmxtox+nx•,mkf:::i:.;..'_7�2:;x ..«.. .+,�;�th+y ;:t+,.
:x.:t4:tt:,..i:F•+�.::x.i:-::..... .b aw:,.,, ,:.xt4.4�.',..x>.:.. ;.xwai' t.ix.';..i'.i:.iixu.i s:.i:::.i:a:. ,:.;:Ft..i:.,.i:4x,si:i;:::.;:
.��V`:.n}naxvnwxda,.ya.vnv ,.nx�Y` 4;,•u:w: ha:::+ ...:..,:.
�:� t���t' �<<<:�bs�z� •<.,4�.:.^�a;a,�at.��� a�' app�:��� �� S���e >:�� ��n:a:c�
.w.>::: :f.::: .e>»:.::.4tJwY.u,?:.::+4. :?`�.:,x;rk.r'..:,.:+':}:•.5}i.>:::,.ii'i.r.:,::.<:aai.f..*.:..:,x..p y.:i;"..w :,:?;'�:,: :.:.tR;:.'.?:i;•:.:.c..i:;:;:::,:.4:n.::.n..::.:::. ,
��.tsla��ans �aa�d the`tsharitFis �,ssued.,� �}ist�ir���ce Ad�#�.sement Mardi:
Osa
. C?ia Q �w xSf ? CT, 1 �? G�lwtYQ4x3ll
Anything constituting a public nuisance as specifically
defined or declared by any other law or ordinance.
8.24.030 Abatement methods.
Public nuisances ordered to be abated under the provisions of
this chapter may be abated by rehabilitation, repair, demolition,
removal or other appropriate action as determined by the council
after compliance by the city with the procedures set forth in this
chapter. (Prior code § - 4400".2)
8.24.040 Resolution setting public hearing.
A. Whenever the council finds, based upon the recommendations
of the city administrative officer or any department head, that a
public nuisance may exist upon any premises, the council may, by
resolution, declare its intent to hold a public hearing , to
ascertain whether the same constitutes a public nuisance which may
be abated under the procedure set forth in this chapter.
B. The resolution shall describe the premises by street
address, referring to the street by the name under which it is
officially or commonly known, shall further describe the property
by giving the lot, block and tract number thereof where applicable
and the parcel number from the assessment roll, shall give a brief
description of the facts forming the basis for the finding, and
shall contain a brief statement of the possible methods available
to abate the alleged nuisance.
. 8.24.050 Posting notice of public hearing.
within thirty days after the passage .of the resolution and at
least fifteen days before the time fixed for the public hearing,
2
the city clerk shall cause to be conspicuously posted on the
premises a certified copy of such resolution, and a notice of the
time and place of hearing before the council, which notice shall
be titled, "Notice of Public Hearing" in letters not less than one
inch in height and shall be substantially in the following form:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO DETERMINE EXISTENCE OF
PUBLIC NUISANCE AND TO ABATE
IN WHOLE OR PART
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on (date) at
the hour of .M. , the Council of the City of
San Luis Obispo will hold a public hearing in the Council
Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, to ascertain whether a public nuisance exists
upon certain premises situated in said City known and
designated as
(street address) and more particularly
described as Lot No. , Block No. , Tract No._
and shown as Parcel No. in
Book , Page in the assessment roll
of the County of san Luis Obispo.
If the Council finds upon the evidence presented at
the hearing that a public nuisance does exist, and if the
same is not promptly abated by the owner of said
premises, said nuisance may be abated by municipal
authorities by rehabilitation, repair, demolition,
removal or other appropriate action, the cost of which
will constitute a lien upon such premises until paid,
saz��ons,.�flr the maantenazice of a lsu��i� nf��ssnce a� :set
��ort?i. �z�tsan �,u�s ohispa,Mu�xazpa3 Code. Se+�t�on} � .24,�$�3 £
The alleged nuisance consists of the following:_
All persons having any objection to, or interest in.
said matters are hereby notified to appear at the public
hearing at the aforesaid time and place, when their
testimony and evidence will be heard and given due
consideration.
Dated:
City Clerk
(Prior code .g 4400.4)
3
a C;?o
8.24.060 Serving notice of public hearing.
A. At least fifteen days before the time fixed for the public
hearing, the city clerk shall cause to be served upon each of the
owners thereof one copy of the notice of public hearing and a
certified copy of the resolution of the council. "Owner" as used
in this chapter shall mean any person known to be in possession' and
also any person having any legal or equitable interest in the
premises as disclosed by a current title search from an accredited
title company.
B. Service shall be by personal service upon any owner whose
name and address appears upon the last equalized assessment roll
and who can reasonably be found within the city limits. . Service
upon all other owners may be accomplished by depositing a stamped,
sealed envelope containing a copy of the notice and resolution in
the U.S. Certified or Registered Mail, return receipt requested,
addressed to each owner at his last known address; and if there is
no known address, then in care of the address of the premises.
Service shall be deemed to be complete at the time of such deposit.
The failure of any person to receive such notice shall not affect
the validity of the abatement proceedings. (Prior code § 4400.5)
8.24.070 Notice--Proof of posting and service.
Before the commencement of the public hearing, the city clerk
shall verify that affidavits or declarations establishing proof of
posting of the premises and proof of service upon all owners within
the required 'time periods have been filed in his office. (Prior
code § 4400.6)
8.24..080 Hearing by council.
At the time stated in the notice, the city council shall hear
and consider all relevant evidence, objections or protests, and
shall receive testimony under oath from owners, witnesses, city
personnel and interested persons relative to the existence of the
alleged public nuisance, the estimated costs of abating the same,
and any other matters which the council deems pertinent thereto.
The hearing may be continued from time to time by the council.
(Prior code § 4400.7)
8.24.090 Hearing--Council's determination.
A. After the conclusion of the hearing, the council shall,
based upon the hearing, determine whether or not a pubic nuisance
exists upon the premises, or any part thereof.
B. If the council finds that such public nuisance does exist
and that there is sufficient cause to require the abatement
thereof, the council may adopt a resolution declaring the existence
4
of the nuisance upon the premises, and ordering the abatement of
the same within thirty days, or within such other tine limit as the
council may specify, by the manner and means specifically set forth
in the resolution. (Prior code § 4400.8)
8.24. 100 Time limitation for filing objections to council's
determination.
Any owner or other interested person having any objections or
feeling aggrieved at any proceeding taken by the council in
ordering the abatement of any public nuisance under the provisions
of this chapter must bring an action to contest such decision
within thirty days after the adoption by the council of the
resolution ordering the abatement of the nuisance. Otherwise, all
objections to such decision shall be deemed waived. (Prior code
§ 4400.9)
8.24.110 Resolution orderi abatement--Service and recordation.
Mmn
A copy of the resolution ordering the abatement of the
nuisance shall be served upon the owners of the property in
accordance with the provisions of Section 8.24.060. Any property
owner shall have the right to have any such premises rehabilitated
or to have such structures demolished, removed or repaired in
accordance with the resolution, at his own expense, provided the
same is done prior to the expiration of the time limit specified
in the resolution. Upon such ' abatement in full by the owner,
proceedings under this chapter shall terminate. If the nuisance
has not been abated as ordered within the specified time limit, the
city clerk shall file in the office of the recorder of the county
a certificate describing the property and certifying (1) that the
property is a public nuisance and (2) that the owner has been so
notified. whenever thereafter the public nuisance has been abated
as ordered, the city clerk shall file a new certificate with the
county recorder certifying that the property is no longer a public
nuisance. (Prior code § 4400.10)
8.24.120 Abatement by city.
If such nuisance is not completely abated by the owner within
the time limit specified by the council, the council may direct the
city administrative officer, or such other city official as may be
designated by him, to cause the same to be abated by city forces
or private contract, and city and contract personnel are expressly
authorized to enter upon the premises for such purpose. Upon
request of the designated official, other city departments shall
cooperate fully and shall render all reasonable assistance in
abating any such nuisance. (Prior code § 4400. 11)
5
8.24.130 Statement of abatement costs.
A. The city administrative officer shall keep an account of
the costs incurred by the •city in abating the nuisance, and shall
submit to the council an itemized statement for each lot or parcel
showing all such costs, including incidental expenses, and noting
any salvage value or storage costs of items removed from the
property; provided, that before the statement is considered by the
council, a copy of the same shall be posted for at least five days
upon such lot or parcel, together with a notice of the time and
place when the statement will be considered by the council for
confirmation. A copy of the statement and notice shall also be
served upon the owners of the lot or parcel in the manner provided
in Section 8.24.060 for serving the notice of public hearing;
provided, that the date of service must be at least prior to the
date the council considers the statement. Proof of the posting and
service shall be accomplished as provided in Section 8. 24.070.
B. The term "incidental expenses" shall include, but not be
limited to, the actual expenses and costs of the city in obtaining .
title reports, in the preparation and service of notices,
preparation of specifications, the preparation and award of all
contracts, all costs of inspecting any work done pursuant to this
chapter, the cost of printing and mailing required under this
chapter, the costs f preparing materials for any hearing held
pursuant to this chapter, and a reasonable additional sum to cover
the cost of administrative overhead. (Prior code § 4400. 12)
8.24.140 Confirmation of statement of abatement costs.
At the time and place for considering the statement, the
council shall consider the statement together with any objections
or protests thereto by the owners or other interested persons. The
decision of the council on all protests shall be final and
conclusive, and the council may approve the statement as submitted,
or may modify it as the council deems just and equitable.
Thereafter, the council shall adopt a resolution confirming the
statement as submitted or as modified. (Prior code § 4400.13)
8.24.150 Assessment of costs--Notice of lien--Collection.
A. Both the owner of the property on which the nuisance was
abated and all persons who created, caused, committed or maintained
the nuisance shall be personally liable to the city for the
abatement costs confirmed by the resolution. In addition, the
abatement costs shall constitute a special assessment against the
respective lot or parcel of land to which it relates, and upon
recordation in the office of the county recorder of a notice of
lien, shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of
such assessment.
6
a �3
B. The form for the notice of lien shall be substantially
as follows:
NOTICE OF LIEN
(Claim of City of San Luis Obispo)
Pursuant to the authority granted by the laws of the
State of California and the Charter and ordinances of the
City of San Luis Obispo, and in compliance with the
provisions thereof, said City has expended the sum of
$ to abate a public nuisance upon
the hereinafter described real property, the City Council
of said City has adopted Resolution No.
confirming said sum as the cost of abatement, and said
sum now constitutes a special assessment and lien upon
said real property until said sum has been paid in full
and discharged of record.
Said real property is situated within the City of san
Luis Obispo, County of san Luis Obispo, State of
California, more particularly described as follows:
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
Dated: , 19
City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
C. After recordation, a certified copy of the notice of lien
shall be delivered to the tax collector and thereafter the amount
of the lien shall be collected at the same time and in the same
manner as ordinary municipal taxes are collected and shall be
subject to the same penalties and the same procedure under
foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency .as provided for
ordinary municipal taxes, or, after such recordation, such lien may
be fore closed by judicial or other sale in the manner and means
provided by law. (Prior code § 4400.14)
8.24.160 Prohibited acts.
A. It is unlawful for any person to remove, deface or
mutilate any notice, order, statement or .resolution posted as
. required in this chapter.
B. It is unlawful for any person to obstruct, impede or
interfere with any owner or his agent or with any representative
7
a c;4
of the city when engaged in performing any act reasonably necessary
for the execution of the order of abatement. (Prior code §
4400. 15)
8.24.170 Alternative methods of abatement or enforcement.
Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed or construed to
prevent the city from commencing any civil or criminal proceedings
otherwise authorized by law for the declaration or abatement of a
nuisance or for the prosecution of a criminal offense which may
also constitute a nuisance. " °°" "ii*p ."°
l <>;;.y. nGes t "€ "ayyr+ Y: >ts:
Iry{t::{}::j.Y:a:.�,;Yi:Ri.;f.:`t.a
:.. ..},•.vn,? .f...._,•n,;�,• ,w.. :,wn,.;n.w,xx.:n-..n,x :::..:. ,. ,rnx::.,w::.xn:.,,[. ..::,... .::rx.. .} ... `
.: .: ..�:.. i..:: . .:: •:�:. .. ..:.:.. }:{.;J. .. y3c:: .. .::`.::'g�::.:..J.. .::��:^,..:,:..:.i:.::.i:r:2::.i:i2;..•,::':.:::i::i;:::;i3::
•}:iCi}'ti0.' :i.. :})F':t+.':i.:i+' i]4Y:v'C••Yti:Y'y]}"it.p:S:':;.:f:mi:!C;}}i}:i.:.:.:i{in{?riit.Y:i::.:{:O•:.Y!n}'f.}}i\{i}iC'{:i':n}}:L':{nxi: '"+ vv,A`YY:a'f61}`;!!n:'.ii>N":ii}:!iin};4:5}HixS;:S:Sx.}•f:ny{.
v2+: ..r ,..h....Fa::" ..N.)::::Gr✓{,v ax?.f1r�,.;';}}r+.:..:�{. i,:•:a: :...:Y.%
cnnsety . .. .r Cead�t��s.... ha:�/. �:.
{.:1lvC• .x:
]::]....tt .. a... ....v.u:..v. :. '^:G{)p{ ' }x
.Y,,xn,+.i}viYn.:. .,.R:.n...v�. J•w:I�J..1. :: (Y]::
4-
.:+.:.�.i.. yqr.S�I.�.�}},':n: y6:Y:.:.: ,.::,v:tY.Y}r;; i:.f:::l}!�"��:,{:!},{,.:'::
b•'` : V.: .1{'Mii} TYfj::: :'r.::::il?t : :{ \T�`k:% "lf' "x:th ;{{ihx. .0�. %": IS
... .:....::..:i:{i:.}i}?::v.
.v.:,.., .,,n.n, ..v:.,v.. .:?:... .:?..,+.::...... ...:::+a?...,i_:..:.:.:;a:,,.:::;..:::.?>:..ai;.!,..::..:?t;"..'QY::{'...:..�.:..w..?"•a:i<l:::y%+raf{,.:.::{i;`::.}'.:if:r.:i:::i::ec.:ii.;:a
ntts�we{wA#xatesenxcsf;ta pibl3cn:x�a3 �t�cttosaon„bf � nna
�a '��7/+�'^.�.}v.^j�,'YG.:vY.C�rid}E�^�O'�A}}T�,Ry'S{Tt;.tc"'kvy»',`yf+,.xY9v,:..: +� :y^.:�.{C.��_{�{i^'wry �"'x�f}•r<-{ {.S.n uy�ktl w,�.vR:>.,qx w;.f s„y:•k,, +�j� �w
y;a•��w 4,ii[��aT`+�v i47ii���y{,yj.��{/���A{F :µr: yS„F�I��i.�57<,i3Fl�r� �'�;li�,]y�Ae G����M�} �4s :Y:}��V��'.3,��,
h v xv,J.:hitf Yf':v:t:.`Yi..}fv:'.Y 'J:al•Y]+,>. .. .... x.if:. YYk.S .:}.?T}':: .}?:.
,.......m:...•Y]...... .nx.c4%,,,v. :.n._}.r.::, -.i.Li,.:::�i�,:nvrv:Jv'.Y:::.., ')y :.4.}�. :.{.. ,Yx.;::'. ..`i!:.ui'
v
v n,.
n..n,. n.x .5:.}>::;i.y:• :•,.•�ry:••:C'v'--+:.::.::5 ,Vn.:,fS}}ii}i:.}}}riiiSnS:a}i}xSi:.}h..:v:mvv,N::L::v;}:fY.if:M:}h.'x}]nt.S>:N;:.w:x�ti}}M.A^LCS:f::}.f:f:::::.C:nN}:wxfnW:.:vwxt b;}}.{n:'.{viC.vl
:x.wvMv%.:..w.v.Sx.�:�.fxtwn,:w:.w.x..::n„vx�vxwxMv.�fi.+.f:.urx.ukvv»n:xW nv:u.vv:ue:m4.:w:::::u,:.vvnvnvnLY».w}.lYihvwnv::v,..:m:u::.,wx..rw
.a+v ,}:(f:: vrv{..w yvH„•v'v' .},M
�+•. ;:Yi.'�'''^',�y''!:}�.�c.:i”"t; i+Y�.:� .'!�`]`'`' `�n.ri:... '::,Y:. n�::nw.,,,,.,?}x,;.xvyrv.
..�..c,...w.;�v';ptn `,' n..: ;! :..r,...:.}.X... ': :::le ...... ..iY.t�,a.a.Y.... ;i7::. TY :.:...A... .... :�rY...: .#.:
•n..v. n.:ii...., ..::,:.,n.:'w..xi .,n....:.....nw.:,:.: ...
.... .m<......... ........... ::a<...w"Y...a..............r...a...3:uo; .........., .a.:{f..ax{.>?:n;.'{:.:: r. i:i.k:.::".: :.n..,v:...
as a .} .:s a, .,:3; tom€::<:::abat' ': : Y
i7 .. . s:k: es.r.. . .: I e....tix .,, l ..... .
'.;n ..."J.:' x.h.n:0•. '.:�: .,f.:is'... ..Cn......:
.:ii v':.:i.:iit-v f:ptr.;.:.y.Y...:}i::i.i]YYYi _ `a:.ii:
f ,,ap».,...: .' :(' \,- .y.: n.,.,•<;.:;r;.r rx':}:i;'"i � v..9 x. :..i..:
.��((.:{,n;t,iyf .. T4.`i;(T•.'. c'¢?":'tea. ,pr/� :'jx. ;:r.{.'.,n.{v}... ''�:i" ;.;:{, i;,
n �Id!f, Y:ryY :" ' 1[1:. :'f11• '..�w}+.'3::.:¢ qI.V +..:ice''.}}{{: ;J�';i�.:y}y.y�..,Jf"yr. }1.•.. Fi4:��:':,.ynn Y� .i.
. ....................
.:.:.:..: ......:: ....nh,:.:if:.._:{•};;'.}}:�.:i?+.:':i.i...v: "S:ti.':.'::1::Y'e,'aY:ik::.::%;:i ii:v: �.x,nrf.v}•:.v::n}'i3.::::..::•,n.:i::nx.:?...::...:n}:::.::
than fir aes.::sha :::be :m�•.•� t , n ars ra
?W'.,n:,:s}`i^+']�.::`:R'{r`::�,`?.:::ii:'t A..:'a;¢.y.<:',+:.{[.}7� ;.°.' +c. }}i,y.}Y.n.'...,-ur
%...
�:�n*� ��r�° o�y.scra;�n enan�e a +
s ..... . :»<>» owe `: .a>Y: ' rc a <s :se.. <<:v o a an °a.
.:;,:.:Y..: n'7' f'.>:-ice f:::n-::..
}3' r a,:'>E..+:.a}:;:::;:vii::..:::,:o'..n.>:f}x:u'.x!�::.. 'L,�. L:u.},[..:n..a:.,+ .,..i::�::.}:{i;i:;.};'Y;i};;:.x
+: xta:}N':,.,y,`�,:,..a.xf A. .x...v nb "��... :::k:iy::5Y(::H.:....+ka)� •a;v {'`'u.+:.
x;..S: .: ...: i: n,
h :Cha .fie sn u::<:atf ]a
'may rvn. :%: rv .... � ' ,.n'.!1:: :.:Qy�,:i;v.::^?};uY:k;:�[} •�j°ri;'%6L'.tom:::,,..:M..yK......,, :%
r: ...• .,,rJ".:n.. .:o-•+,.i;:. :.v. .:'�::;^.i.?+r#` v'T+J.::L. .,
tuma:ma:{.}:i;ii:.'::•i..:.<a.?..;�
Gbristzt#y Qsa 5�paei.CeAse, }Thi v3 x5 cstS3 3�+ :puisha�Sle
n. .x.,rx,,: u»:..loa .9,.w:- x,f:n. i ..a,.xwaxw[ .,•„t x,w::w i..:..:xwx.x;)s}:
NAME_,
}:nv/n„ nA4.vnxtw..rvn.v.,vv:JnxxxmW.R.:xnv„�i�.iv.•nn nvf en....vnCnx:.x..nx..xrv.:ivxn.::n,v.iw:xnv:::env}}xw::::::nv::.vijx!.ni:}iy,:nx-n'n'n+.i:C:.w::nvrvn..n:.
..n[n:.[Y+'[ ,::::n , .. ,. .:..:: :a.n xa}xi `.}:•isf::::'tpii.:::.i::i,tx:;v<:i:::{Sf:i_{a.;i::v:;:`•?'t}};i;:
s� se3'stise ake aC 1a >:tn:}..:abate e.';pu?�1 nx �sance� as herein
.:x:.:%:>...n..:'C.ii ..:1}K . `x.. v yl. �;.n..i +.i: k n.. ttl4v..�:: W'J f:}.Yv+ .{t y.
.4Ct{ �:i:{{:Y
1.
til ` d13 . ': xY;:: tt8t':>>.
a, �v �`:e�s� �.x�'�nadz� :��axtc�::��: <:ath��:::<�r;i"h
...T:... .::��vk.v:�;Tan.?..
LRM!:.:::.::..::.:.C?:. ::..�`:r.,{i{ =:..,.n.:.:v:
�:.K:;Vyf i:{!.;:
v..
,.r:Ro:'i,y
I:}V.,:',Y..:ay.a'rry'..t'..t..,..vF,>,:..nu.'�x..'?{+\.♦.5::.r).W:"mo.+.{`.,.%vn:m re'...vv?ia�a:+:3:'r:x:�..c:e.n.,`.::,�:d..Ya`.f.yf`.�..%a�k}a,{�',vu,:.�a]C'`:.v�c:a..a#}':s...':.%er,:+•.:.3e'}.;ac.;;.:u.;.t}:}funa::;.,:<.}�....,✓n..a,a.,..a:.y..:,,Y.:...v-ea,..;..s.','x.!.a.:a:�T.::,}%('-V({�,�..jC...::..:'.:a:.`:,,...:.e..:.::p.>.;s.:,.:<:.u::.::.::.,:.:?..A:a..::.A:,.i..::.?.e:..::{.,i...}.v�.::�i'.!b:.<fr>::;::{t':.}":.i::{.}}.,:n].".>+n�'vx?i'i':;.%.:..,>i.Yu.::>3i:..,'.:ri{.,}.s�.r.<a.,.::%.f..av..:<;:..aSx,.a#:}#'.:Y�ca:{:::fn..:m.:un.a,::;a:i�;.:}n:n:ii�Yrr:o3:.iex..'.tQ
:�nc:.+ i,:,�:�.n,..,ia?%•:.r...::: d ..\r} . :.::+s.....`:..::tis.a.•i:s+rva.�?�::.i:n
t�.
:;�3ia:::
x . a (
.........i'.:ui,:.;..}cia.:.;.s: ::]{} f:
:IY,
'ut
�.w:+. ::Y{tiF'{��.{c'''.+�ia'A. 4^'.�'iL'i:: i:: ,^Ynili :°: ':4!ilx':%i:{�i'M:i'�:��•'..�}.}�';"f �r.":!iI{'�.tri..�4�w-I::'f:��S%��:i�;j`.y.:i�'ii�i��'�i:i�:'•�n^: V� ii:9�.
...� kY: :^:4M1'� .'F.i;iir•.�,�Y:-nv,SY.C{Y vva}YS}:f+xi N:lnrn}i:Si' rIv]inn%.xi}%.iviiix:i.v v.}}i(Yn}x i::;}rw ..];Fv:.�.e :n:I.!}i .. .. ::
.. .:.a. :..(['<.:.n.a:t:.!:.a.:.:fi.}...:.:v:n: .:.,.::::}:.. �`?: }::.:. .::Y.:..v..C'r.:ix:Y:i::'f..,. '`.j•:aY'(/ih':d' ,FAY.. {Z,+'nf+k:{{<i'!S:::Y.:S.v.:r}:�::n}Y:v:{i}�;..a,'.,v,'4:,,'.i:::.m
f"�}:i�`^',i,;••:�vy,Y;.•,:}':.y{^�++Cy��`-',t[y',(�+iv-:L<Yn::�.[v'°:` ,syn::ra,.Y.,::}�Y.;r.:o:S :;.�...rt:s;n,ivs} }uy�.'$U,nvt R.xi�(.;3`�[ ,o ;G, ,:.aa�', :w.Y..:�:n
;ma'Gxwxow,c.-uxxmwa ,tawid}}xfxaxtx :xid
,...w. n,,, ++xxx-
.. .' n .... ....�.j�v,vl ,M'+r,},:^,:.)M' .•y^Mv{.•n.,J.a..i....}•Sv::iFi.'V}}'FM?yxh.•}A,:M?'(n:,v.:x'Y.x+f:<{m
�}xYn`':�} :!�:LI ... .. w:FYn'Y^uv.x,w:
°` e� xM:<=afn`" :zsY; a . .ex< :rv: h >>a".��`yy: at +bn
' ,:fr.Y+. "'Y.•:::;:: a:.x:.;:f:::xto}}}:C} }:f.Y:.'r YF:?}}x.:f�:: .:}r.?i:.;:.:.........:.
.. .nn..::r,. ...,......v. ...
..a.},.:.h� I} $;....:�].v ::::'::` :.: ;Y;:. :.S}.:. '
..,...Y:'ri "},;}. .H;M;:>n°c:.ots... t; Mx a ,.. .a,..:' +',,.:?: .:v. :}..,, : i:.r:;:^�'+¢`:4.a;}f:•;R'i.3:ry!...:�:v,:::::::';. ::n
8
a-as
prsis ;ta 'tether persons .ter>; . art�tttstax�ces, shad dot
aechdeb ...ar� :'sZa '.> antinu :> xi:.ful; . zeeffect.:::: a
this: iexzyd. zovons oP this, chapter, za�hxahole and �n part, art.
9
SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE DEPARTMENT
OPERATIONS DIRECTIVE DRAFT
NUISANCE ABATEMENT ORDINANCE
I . POLICY
It shall be the policy of the San Luis Obispo Police
Department to work with the community to abate public
nuisances involving loud or unruly assemblages in the City.
II. PURPOSE
To establish administrative procedures to abate public
nuisances involving loud or unruly assemblages as defined in
Chapter 8 .24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
III. PROCEDURES
A. Response Notifications
1. Crime Prevention Coordinator
a. The Crime Prevention Coordinator will review the
Daily Report logs for noise ordinance violations.
b. For purposes of the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance,
the Crime Prevention Coordinator will. count as a
"response" those violations involving the issuance
of a Disturbance Advisement Card, a citation for a
Noise Ordinance Violation, or an arrest' for a
related violation (415 P.C.--Disturbance of the
Peace) .
C. If an incident is the second in a sixty day period,
the Crime Prevention Coordinator will determine the
property owner for the location and forward the
information to the Administrative Lieutenant.
2 . Administrative Lieutenant
a. The Administrative Lieutenant will review the
information presented by the Crime Prevention
Coordinator to verify it meets the criteria of the
ordinance.
b. On a second violation, the Administrative Lieutenant
will send a registered letter with return receipt
to the property owner with information regarding the
two responses and applicability of the Nuisance
Abatement Ordinance.
ATTACKME,JT #3 a 7
DRAFT
B. Property Owner Assistance
The Department will assist property owners and other
concerned parties in attempting to resolve disturbances
at problem locations.
1. Administrative Lieutenant
a. The Administrative Lieutenant will be responsible
for coordinating Department and/or other resources
to work with concerned property owners and other
parties.
b. Requests from property owners for assistance will
be initially referred to. the Administrative
Lieutenant. The Lieutenant will determine which
resource or course of action is most appropriate for
each instance. Resources or referrals may include:
( 1) Crime Prevention Coordinator
(2) Patrol Operations personnel
(3)-- San Luis- Obispo Property Owners Association
(4) San Luis Obispo Human Relations Commission
(5) Appropriate University/College group
(6) SLO City Community Development Department
(7) Sam Luis Obispo Association of Realtors
(8) Other appropriate community groups
C. The Administrative Lieutenant will not provide legal
advice. Concerned parties will be advised to seek
their own legal counsel.
C. Nuisance Abatement Procedures
The abatement process will proceed only after all other
reasonable efforts have not abated the problem.
1. Administrative Lieutenant .
a. When the Administrative Lieutenant believes that the.
formal abatement process is required, he will
prepare all applicable information and forward it
to the Administrative Captain.
DRAFT
2. Administrative Captain
a. The Administrative Captain will review the
information and then forward it with a
recommendation for appropriate action to the Chief
of Police.
3. Chief of Police
a. The Chief of Police will review the recommendation.
Upon determination that abatement of the property
is warranted, he will forward the information to the
City Attorney for appropriate action.
Oe dd
'01SE' COMPLAIV 'S
3000
2900
2800
2700 TOTAL COMPLAINTS
2600 2,540
2500 2,436
2400
2300
2200 2,182
2100
2000 1 ,994
1900
1800
1700 116-9-6-
1600
,6961600
1500 OFFICER HOURS
1400
1300 1 ,266
200 ♦�
1100 19082 ��' ~�.� 1 ,044
1000 955 ���' y_ 960
900 ♦- 1
800
700
600
500
400 CITATIONS
300 256
200 153 151
150 , ,♦. . . . . . . . . . .♦- . , . 148
100 78
50
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
ATTACHMENT #4
a�a
All
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
P.O. Box 12604 . San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
December 5 , 1991
Jim Gardiner, Chief of Police
Police Department, City of San Luis Obispo
P.O. Box 1328
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Dear Chief Gardiner:
As chairperson of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods , it is
my pleasure on behalf of the organization to write this letter of
support for the amendment to the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance.
This amemdment will place the burden of responsibility for
their tenant ' s disruptions and nuisance behavior directly on the
landlords which is where it should be.
I , personally, had hoped that our positive actions with
education and neighborhood cooperation activite.s would work
without taking more disclipinary measures. And to some extenct ,
it has been effective. Residents for Quality Neighborhoods will
continue to take this positive approach to reach the goals of
neighborhood preservation of quality neighborhoods.
However, in order to encourage the landlords , property
managers and realtors to "maintaining quality neighborhoods" , our
organization support this amendment.
I am writing this letter of support to you, so that you may
use it in your presentation to the. City Council . We will also
have a representative at the meeting to verbally add our support.
Sincerely,
Dottylonner, Chairperson
ATTACHMENT #5
a-31
OFF CAMPUS STUDEN40USING ASSeOCIATION
1050 Foothill Blvd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 544-8414
January 10 , 1992
Mr. James Gardiner
Chief of Police
City of San Luis Obispo
1042 Walnut
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Proposed Amendments, Nuisance Abatement Ordinance
Dear Chief Gardiner:
In late November 1991 you gave me a copy of the proposed Amendments
to the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance. The Amendment was copied and
circulated to all members of the Off-Campus Student Housing Association
and members responded to me regarding concerns they had. On December
16 , 1991 I wrote you the attached letter and on January 2, 1992 you,
Chris Becker and I discussed the Association' s concerns and your
responses to those concerns.
The Association supports the concept that all landlord/owners have a
responsibility to maintain their properties in a "good neighborhood"
fashion. This includes the requirement of tenant leases which clearly
deliniate the tenant' s responsibility to use the leased property in
such a manner as to not be offensive to the normal and reasonable
rights of neighbors.
After an in-depth discussion with you, which included your rationale
for proposing the Amendment, the• Association . sees nothing in the
Amendments which would be detrimental to a responsible landlord/owner.
Thank you for soliciting the views of our Association.
Cordially,
,.STUDENT HOUSING ASSOCIATION
c _
d c o
President
ATTACHMENT 3#6 n _��
OFF CAMPUS STUDENT KJuSING ASSOCIATION
1050 Foothill Blvd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
(805) 544-841
December 16 , 1991
Mr. James Gardiner
Chief of Police
City of San Luis Obispo
1042 Walnut
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dear Chief Gardiner:
The Off-Campus Student Housing Association has reviewed the proposed
amendment to the ordinance regarding nuisance abatement and has the
following concerns :
f:
1. The amendment should have some language stressing that in the case
of multiple residential units, each separate unit will be considered
independent and exclusive with regard to citation for abatement proceedings.
2. Section 5. 24 . 020 D states that an "occurrence. . . . . . . and requires a
police response to control" . The Association feels the term "occurrence"
should be defined to mean a written citation. Possibly it does , but we
feel it should be more clearly defined.
3 . Clearly, the landlord/owner must receive a copy of any citation issued
by the Police Department to his tenants . Absent a copy of a citation the
landlord/owner is unaware of the problem and has no ability to rectify
the problem.
4 . As landlords/owners , all of our members are subject to the real estate
laws of California. We all have our own in-house rules relative to noise
and disturbance and each of us has his own lease with tenants to protect
both ourselves and our tenants under California law. Some- members use
fines as a way to control noise but all of these "control methods" must
be part of. the Lease Agreement. In recognition of tenants ' rights under
California law, the following issues arise: 1
a) If a tenant is alleged to be in violation of the city ordinance , IP
can a landlord/owner legally proceed with the eviction process
even before the tenant is proven quilty, or does the landlord/
owner need to wait until a court ruling is given?
b) Given the time delays in proceeding with an eviction, how lenient
will the city be with the landlord/owner if the landlord/owner is
doing all he can legally?
a-33
Chief James Gardiner
December 16 , 1991
Page Two
c) What happens in a multi-unit complex when a tenant allegedly
violates the ordinance but the landlord feels that mcving the
tenant will solve the problem? The landlord/owner has made
efforts to remedy the nuisance, but the tenant doesn' t respond?
The Off-Campus Student Housing Association is .supportive of the.-concept-
that
he_concept _ _
that the landlord/owner has a responsibility to maintain his property
in a "good neighbor" manner. Each member of the Association does, in
fact, have a "neighbor" of several hundred students within his own
complex and consequently, each of us strives to have his own "in-house
neighborhood" a place that other students (people) want to live. We
understand the problems of the classic, family. neighborhoods when they
are forced to adapt to widely divergent life styles.
f
Thank you for soliciting our views.
Cordially,
OFF-CAMPUS STUDENT HOUSING ASSOCIATION
Donkld• D. KcCombs
President
'S
is
• .r
iS
a
SAN LUIS OBISPO ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, INC.
443 MARSH STREET/SAN LUIS OBISPO/CALIFORNIA 93401 /(805)541-2282/ FAX (805) 544-281
REALTOR®
March 18, 1992
Jim Gardiner
Police Chief
San Luis Obispo Police Department
1042 Walnut Street
San Luis Obispo, CA. 93401
Dear Police Chief Gardiner:
The San Luis Obispo Association of Realtors appreciate the Police
Department's . efforts to solve the problems created by loud and unruly
parties in the City's neighborhoods. However, we disagree with the
proposed amendment to the City's Nuisance Ordinance that would hold
property owners criminally liable for the actions of their tenants. We
only object because:
1. Individuals should be held responsible for their own actions.
To hold property owners responsible for the actions of
irresponsible tenants is analogous to a car rental company being
responsible for the renters actions when the renter of the car
later drives while drunk.
It is wrong to burden private property owners
in this manner. The property owner already has a vested
interest in solving the problem since it is likely that the unruly
tenants are causing damage to his property.
2. It is inappropriate to put our City Council in the position of
"judge and jury" to solve the problem of noisy tenants.
In an effort to help solve the problem we would suggest the following:
1. Establish a system at the Police Department where a computer
generated form letter is automatically sent to property- owners
for EACH citation issued. More often than not, property owners
have no idea that their tenants are causing a problem.
ATTACHMENT #7 pl '35
Page 2
Police Chief Gardiner
March 18, 1992
2. After the second or third notice goes out on a particular
property, refer this property to the Association of Realtors. Allow
us to help by contacting the owner to encourage his cooperation in
solving the problem. We have the expertise to make those
suggestions. One example would' be to suggest a better lease
agreement.
The above ideas could be implemented by simply changing Police
Department Policy. There is no need for another law.
Stiffer fines on the offending tenants and prompt communication with
the property owner as outlined above is the best solution. When the
house at Chaplin and Fredricks Streets had a tremendous problem and
you communicated with the property owner, the unruly parties
stopped. It is unlikely this property owner would have ever known the
serious nature of the situation unless you had told him.
We appreciate the fine job the Police Department does in our City. We
are confident that the above suggestions will lighten the police burden
so you can concentrate on more serious problems.
Sincerely,
David Slade
President
C.C. Mayor Ron Dunin
Councilwoman Peg Pinard
Councilwoman Penny Rappa
Councilman Jerry Reiss
Councilman. Bill Roalman
a -3(,
San Luis Obispo
Property Owners Association
P.O. Box 12924
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
February 3,, 1992
Police Chief Gardiner
San Luis Obispo Police Department
1042.Walnut Street .' _
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401,
Re. Proposed City of San Luis Obispo Nuisance Ordinance
Dear Police Chief Gardiner.::
The.San, Luis Obispo Property Owners Association has reviewed the proposed
amendment -to the .city. nuisance.abatement ordinance. We have drafted a
_. _ .
y
response=to'"this--proposal t2at includes_ three osition aLL We call our
ecial attentionto the first.two osition papers as our rim alternatives.
These two=-papers,explore concrete suggestions-for-alternatives to the-ordinance.
The third position paper is only a last resort and it is our hope that you will agree
with us the. the ordinance.is not necessary.
We believe that the majority of property owners are responsible landlords and
desire to rent only to quality tenants. We very much appreciate your asking us to
respond to this proposed ordinance and hope that an alternative can be worked
out that is reasonable and acceptable to all parties. , We recognize that your
department has a job to do and we appreciate your efforts.: However, we do feel
that.the ordinance;. as.worded, is too severe and not necessary.
y. 0 .
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
} Re pectfully 6iiiltted, _
x. Rollie.McCorauck S' Y
rate,.
PR sident.
t n.ak4 'Y.=.+.f n iw"VYL'ar •n .- S 7 ..n 1 3. " } ` 'i _'*.r - 1
:+ro
4tlt .+ sd `J?'�uu? c. 'rY.J.Ck'�' o M r^ •r . n rile. Z rr .�+,,�,,,,�IIvir-M-.
San Luis Obispo Properly Owners Associationw'r` X
«' ' ,��:._.. J,: „'uX!.�.5•vivc_:.a 'f-'ac .�';� ,+`...r:. r.”" ,•+ 'i� .
y _ .a r J { J. t -y.;' c.,• Z r Ft x l � r J '.ayv✓ Y vy
Ir^" 'a'4 y a�' at` .•L��ry F�"`'a�, -i'^-`e' .r ,5.8�>� .z c, ,� tii`;tt`'S 1� «�� .s +�'r 7'"a. a 1K.t ^ ?
-
Y
ATTACN�t•IE�iT 1�3 ti z
1vrypyy _ j ' 1 '^ • 4Tr 1 F -. , 1ry�41' 1�]ry�. tea
- :J1 5 -Lr✓ &� .� c ..d.� �'* r rT. t +.. -t1 ': m du ry � .i # :} „y� c,,.
San Luis Obispo
Nuisance Ordinance T perty Owners Associativ
P.O.Box 1=4
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
Position Paper#1
IE OWNER LIABILITY PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ARE UNACCEPTABLE
A. Owners Should Not and Cannot Be Held Criminally Liable for the Actions of Individual
Tenants. Patrons or Invitees
Following notice to owners of a"nuisance" resulting from multiple police responses to "loud or
unruly"conduct, an n owner who "fails or neglects to remove or otherwise take action to abate the
public nuisance . . . shall be guilty of an infraction.0 This criminal standard implies that owners have
control over individuals who violate the law or otherwise disturb the peace. While police do not be-
lieve their actions will correct the indvidual's behavior, this ordnance presumes an owner will have
anymore luck, even though the owner has no police power. In many cases, the owner will have little
or no ability,to take corrective.action. Several examples show the difficulty and innapropriateness of _
shifting police responslbi!it%j onto lardlerds. _
-A popular bar is inundated by a large party one evening and things get out of hand, bringing
on the police. :Thirty days later a fight breaks out among two patrons. A third such incidence occurs
within the next thirty. days. How can the owner of the property be criminally liable for such a"nu!-
-The owner of shopping center property with ten businesses has longterm, triple net leases
... .
with several tenants_The.leases give virtually no enforcement powers to the landlord._ Police are
ied in to three eparate businesses wthin,sixty days. Should the owner have responsibility for this
—Four tenants.five in a rental house, with four separate leases. Police are called in to re-
spond to three incidents, involving one of the renters and several guests and invitees. Should the
landlord evict all the tenants? What if there is just one lease for the four tenants? What if the eviction
is defended by the tenants on the basis that 1) One or more of them had no personal involvement in
the incident and/or 2) The ordinance is unenforceable and is not a basis for eviction.
—The popular bar in the first example is owned by twelve individual family members. Which
member should go to jail for failing to abate the "nuisance'caused by guests and invitees of the bar?-.
L
B' The Ordinance Does Not Solve the Problem of the Rowdy and Unruly Individual
-
Suppose thelandlordin one of the labove example successfully evicts a tenant under threat of-
1
criminal prosecxition by the City:;That tenant moves to a new location in the City and:repeats the
-_
behavior(not Having ever been penalized,by the police) ,How has the problem been corrected? Isn't . _ .
it a police. responsiblity to,reign in illegal behavior If ft is not illegal;why should the owner be crinn
Wally liable for mdiwdua!actions
.r a.r th'4c~� �.r...✓nrn'�•- + J, r, �. - '-r ''�' '�Lry � R r �_. L .
,�..{�• J .ip��
4X wti •f. aY _ R 'C • h'*
fj f.-•vn�f w '� Y'Lk'.'Tr'•`hr. YakN?h�AS'{ Y Y C•f�4 0.: �r,;.b. yry1G
- `r..L,tM�..'yw ' Y ) 1. ]lro. X.v� • „tr'S MriLr'a '� C^y'6-Sv7V iil'rC�w?+-'• '}.�q�a'_!.�a` .K 'r'_ l :_
C This Ordinance is'Too Drastic forthe.Venr Few Neighborhood Com tibili46 Cases Where
. ..lice R a oo SeS Are IVot Effective x„a j"
r ?�A 11M. 1'-tl 4 L �'• �y� S' '-fry .
- ,y 4
yt5
�e MF
.g r .c't .w '"�•'ywxy4vV .y. .+".+C@h f7 •..•�,G s`hl>y !
_ „_The ordnance is model) alter Southern California drug curtailment ro ram h ee •
...n:..:.r. v .r ,. :::n. .fr j' y-..*..119't'+�ldl:'n f�Y�iry MY.• - yT'v�v l.h.. ...r..lb...-iii'-rS~iR�n.n+L... _f'.Y�.��y�;{ QY7 _T J,n J'f.[n-IT.`'
,p.. x �"�zCi�"^ar5. r .�a�:'�)�-< ��•"e �f=_�. �."1�r.�� .:er. �i.�uai Y:A"' t C w �.A- n _ ..�.
used in the crack house type of, -, Aon. There are no known judick ecedents unholding its
validity. SLO does not have a crack house problem, at least that the public is aware of. Instead, the
complaints seem to be driven by incompatibilities between students and non-students in residential
neighborhoods. While there are numerous such complaints in the course of a year, relatively few
locations in the City result in multiple police responses. City staff has indicated that there might only
be four or five locations where the owner would be noticed pursuant to the abatement procedures of
the ordinance. Given this small number of properties, the broad-sweeping and controversial owner
liability provisions of the ordinance should be dropped. .
D. The Ordinance Definitions and Standards are Impossible to Understand. Leading to Poten-
tial Unenforceability and Certain Friction Between the City and Propedy Own=
The Ordinance defines a nuisance as including a property where there are three police re-
sponses for"rowdy or unruly assemblages . that threaten the public peace, health, safety or gen-
eral welfare.' Each word of this criminal standard could be the subject of extensive debate. This
debate will involve numerous individuals and public bodes, employees and officials, including the .
individuals invclved, the owner of the property, the police staff;the.City Council and, finally, a judge.
Since the,City staff has announced that it intends to use the ordinance as leverage to force owners to
solve alleged "nuisance'situations, the City will undoubtedly use the broadest application of this
vague and possibly unenforceable standard.
Owners are liable under the-Ordinance if he or she "_fails or neglects to remove or otherwise
take action to abate the public nuisance: Although the City}has indicated it will adopt administra-
tive guidelines to define just what mAction'is expected to meet this standard; it is easy to envision
disputes over what will be required.- For example, is a landlord required to Initiate an eviction pro-
ceedng against the tenants-of the property? If so; the landlord may not have-adequate legal grounds.
to bring_the_actionI such as cases_where the assemblages did not involve the tenants themselves. _
The landlord faces exposure to attomey's fees of the tenant if the tenantsuocessfully defends the
action, perhaps based upon the vagueness of the ordnance itself. A landlord might ask, just what is
he or she paying taxes for if he.or she takes on the role of policemen in neighborhood disputes?
r
of
.
,P-
A
' f 1 Y'M1 ✓Y L � 1
_ - .�tits - S i s.. r P'ory,,t 4-1, s C+L'1^"
pY
:! O�
e�MI..
�
/.. '.4`
PRO f •' 'fes r. ^SF Y.•r+. 1 „ . , }{v-S7T` .'15'i 1,..
__i wa.t rr:,- +!.sl- ." .. I-..IZ � T•..3`TrC W .� „w,. 1 1
C ���; . , ••fir„' + _ _ �„ n •-• ' � 1te
c. KYL;' '_1:+A�,.•: .�'i '�'•mem”' '=�� ��J v. �f �. a.y�+5�anxf�y~v.�,a: T'S'B.�d �'l'- y'y � - l - 1
-SF ;.,]�.�r �� '• � /i.� z.`_. .PLS 'S.. � ..�"i+.= Ry,:Sa �. 5 r re .. y_
Position Paper#2
MER THAN ADOPT THE ORDINANCE, THE CITY SHOULD WORK WITH PROPERTY OWN-
ERS TO IMPLEMENT AN OVERALL STRATEGY DEALING WITH NEIGHBORHOOD INCOMPAT-
IBILITY
NCOMPATIBILITY PROBLEMS
There are a number of ordinances in the works and at least one on the books addressing a
perceived problem in having student housing in residential, single family neighborhoods. Rather than
throw a host of unique ordinances of questionable enforceability into the equation, property owners
suggest alternatives which foster cooperative efforts to improve the situation. A few suggestions are
listed below:
A.- Create a Mediation Board to Rule on complaints
The Board of Realtors has a regularly.functioning mediation board to handle disputes involving
member realtors.. This private board functions extremely well. A similar board could be created to
handle neighborhood compatibility disputes. Options could include recommendations to the City.
B.. Create Model Lease Language Prohibiting Loud or Unruly Conduct Resulting in Police
Res ones. 17.
Private organizations could develop and circulate language giving landlords the authority to
force tenants to keep neighborhood disturbance to a minimum::This language could be developed in
*rationn with the City Attomey�' --
C. Develoo an Education Pro ram for Landlords and Tenants:
The City and property owner/realtor groups could jointly sponsor public education forums,
mailers, etc. The goal would be to give neighborhood residents an opportunity to identify problems
before they become serious enough to warrant police response.
-
J j' I
_
p.
' 1
r e
..i r •"•1Z.. '�� �'F�u"��'.` i�.t ^�.�. � �.:vy :] .>J. rLt . vT1�r = w c - c -�^- T' ,, is
y�hyTl y ,G .�,f . 1�..e'C 'y '• ".
A
T7 '1'Ss• .'v 6 � F wr G Y w.4 T
r F
'�^yK'•J.'n'A��wL L�/`.A�''M.TK 1 5a, 1^�aV ff. ..+
�•L� - yr �� IcaM .r 5� K 1 1 ° s < �. 17
� yYS .� R
s,�e —C-v� �r 1 .°r" C r✓"'1Q .-.. -5� �".Ynef.S� yt �W� .
J I. .l' < ilti-. m�.i -r•1^' Ce 'j 1- • .r N YSS` .dine i. -:
'+..- s•,+i�x `�
F7'
i'} -x' ,. �, ;•r r iTi -i—,..p�u{
� r
� :t.. r .ly- 'J`♦ Yi Y?.r .q .Y.i y.. r �+.5^ o't ^y- yr % F !' n
� 4C'nTMrj� �. +:4 �* �` 4 .� , �-.N r'+'..en �•�.�Y� TQzs,,a•,,."'t"fj��'�,{,e ayt�."�,-�>' a- '.
��ieY ..�4' I _kY.ln,+ 4 _ 1 N ql 1-.V. .d r.• L j}•4 IS A'
A POSITION PAPER #3
IF THE ORDINANCE IS TO BE ADOPTED, CERTAIN CHANGES MUST BE MADE
A. Administrative Regulations Must be Adopted Concurrently with the Ordinance. Subject to
Modification Only After Public Hearings.
City staff has responded to many expressions of concern by claiming that administrative regu-
lations will be developed to implement the Ordinance. Obviously, these regulations are critical as
they will establish the procedures the City expects property owners to follow, as well as guidelines
for understanding the vague terms of the Ordinance. The regulations are critical enough to be avail-
able for public and City Council review before adoption of the Ordinance. Further, the regulations
should be referred to in the text of the Ordinance, with the provision that they are approved by the
City Council and may be amended or modified only after a noticed public hearing before the City
Council.
B. Criminal Intent Must be Defined to Include Only those Situations Where a PropeU ProperOwner
has the Definite Authority to Correct Rowdy or Unruly Behavior.
Many leases leave little, if any, discretion in the property owner over individual behavior on a
property. If adopted, the Board of Realtors and other groups will no doubt recommend property
owners refer to the Ordinance in leases, allowing a better opportunity to enforce the Ordinance .
following notice from the City. Until such time as these lease provisions become commonplace,
however, property owners may not have rights under their leases to control activities on their proper-
ties. The Ordnance should be modified to add the following to Section 8.24.180:
- "No owner shall be liable under this Chapter unless he or she is
- legally able to exert control over the activities on his or her property. A
-- presumption such control exists arises where an agreement refers to .. -----the requirement of compliance with this Chapter.'
C. No Owner Should be Held Responsible or Otherwise Noticed or Prosecuted Under the
Ordnance Until and Unless the Police Have Take All Reasonable Means to Stop the Activity Com-
plained of. .
The Ordnance should not operate to replace police duties with property owner action. Prop-
erty owners are not trained in physical confrontationl. The Ordinance should not put a landlord in the
position of seeking to abate physical activity under threat of criminal prosecution. Moreover, the
police have many more legal and physical means at their disposal for dispute resolution.. Property
owners pay taxes and should.receive the benefit of police protection, as well as troubled neighbors.
The following should be added to the administrative regulations.
°No notice of violation of.Chapter 8.24 shall be served on any y;
property owner until and unless the City enforcement personnel
have taken all viable and reasonable means to correct the.
perceived problem; including prosecution under the City's noise
ordinance and arrest and prosecution of individuals causing or
_. _
r. ,
_ participafing in the alleged loud or unruly assemblages."�
} _
D. Adopt and/or Promote Voluntary Compliance Efforts a Fr ..
At the same time the Council adopts the,Ordinance it should4devote equal eriengiesto 1) • , - ,
promotion of a private mediation board to resolve neighborhood disputes,.2) endorse a oiila infor t '
mation effort, using City staff and private organiiations,,and 3).encourage property"owners to'de=
velop model language for inclusion in leases �,i r � `'
..P. .-] -V.
_ +w e• - :y: -,yam +w+'i :cat ����'���sN,,y�.'+'F` '�rf'c y.�*"J t ".•'. 4.
i •. - w.. _ - -.. .. - - w ,a._.� ......_ 'Rwsv...�:�a..,.. �.a;..i..�C ..._A... _r tr ,-f : I_ -.
MEETING AGENDA
DATE 4 ITEM# _
thomas r. patterson, ina
. P.O.eoz 1224
Ban Lute Ob M CA 86408
Heal Vacate Coag
(805)5ok-8= COPLES TO:
April 3, 1992 0-Dauges Adion ❑ FYI
N Council 13CDD DfR.
O 11 FIN.DRAO ElmE CHIEF
P70MVEY ❑/FlyDR
LERK/ORIC. POLIO CFL
City Council MembersO❑ Mc.�T�"'I ❑ PLECD1?
City of San Luis Obispo Id 'r L IR
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
RE: Proposed Nuisance Abatement Ordinance"
Agenda Item April 7, 1992
I have reviewed the proposed nuisance abatement
ordinance. The ordinance is obviously drafted for a good
purpose but it has two major defects and these need to be.
corrected before it is adopted:
1 . The ordinance should not apply to non-residential
real estate . It is designed for protection of
neighborhoods and to impose the same standard on
businesses and owners of commercial real estate is
unreasonable .
2 . A standard notification with desired and/or required
action should be sent to all property owners at such
time as there has been a second police response .
This should define what action is required by the
property owner to insure the property owner will not
be subject to criminal sanctions .
Thank you for your attention and please incorporate these
thoughts in the ordinance .
Sincerely,
Charles L. Senn
CLS:pcb 7• PM
APR 1
xc : Jeff Jorgensen CITY COUNCIL
John Dunn SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
Jim Gardiner