City looks to put teeth into city code enforcement

0
166

One council member says he is not interested in increasing “the police powers of code enforcement.”

By Jonathan Friedman / Assistant Editor

Those violating the municipal code could soon be forced to pay city fines. At its meeting on Monday night, the City Council voted 3-1 to institute fines for violations regarding the building code, zoning, animal nuisance and other items that the city says “do not constitute immediate threats to public health and safety.”

The city has the authority to file criminal infraction or misdemeanor actions against those with serious violations of the municipal code. But city officials have limited ability to do anything regarding minor violations other than informing the person about it. The council approved two ordinances on Monday that will give the city that enforcement ability. However, the approved ordinances do not define a dollar amount for the fines. City staff will come back with that proposal later.

According to the new rules, a violator would receive a citation from a code enforcement officer. The violator would be required to pay a fine within 30 days, or file an appeal. There would also be an option for the person to correct the violation and not pay a fine, if permissible. Paying a fine would also not prevent the person from having to correct the violation or prevent the person from being fined for repeating the violation.

A hearing officer designated by the city manager would hear appeals. The hearing would take place from 15 to 60 days after the appeal is requested. The officer would make a decision no later than 15 days after the hearing, but could decide as soon as immediately following the hearing. That decision could be appealed to the Los Angeles Superior Court.

While some council members, most vocally Jefferson “Zuma Jay” Wagner, were pleased to put “some teeth” into the city’s code enforcement, this enthusiasm was not shared by Mayor Pro Tem Andy Stern. He cast the lone vote against the ordinances.

“I was not for increasing the police powers of code enforcement,” said Stern during an interview Tuesday afternoon. “I just don’t want code enforcement people going around ticketing people.”

Stern said, in the wrong hands, this power could lead to problems.

Earlier in the meeting, the council was unable to break a 2-2 deadlock on a measure involving how alleged code violations are reported to the city. The current council policy is that nearly all violation reports must be submitted in writing to the city with the name of the complainant being public record. The exceptions being a person could anonymously complain about possible threats to public safety and health, as well as grading without a permit. Even those complaints are not completely anonymous, with the code enforcement officer being required to know the complainant’s name, but the name would not be made public. City staff wanted to add violations of permits and of zoning in non-residential areas to the list of anonymous reports.

Councilmember Sharon Barovsky said she did not want violations of permits added to the list and wanted grading without a permit removed.

“I think we’re heading right back to the old days of neighbors [accusing] neighbors and anonymous calls,” Barovsky said. “That has almost gone away. I remember those days. I wasn’t on the council and thank God. But I watched what went on. And I don’t want to go back there.”

Mayor Pamela Conley Ulich voted with Barovsky. However, Stern and Wagner voted against the changes.

Stern said on Tuesday he voted against the measure because “the wording of it versus what the staff said it said was unclear.” Wagner said on Tuesday he also found the proposal confusing.

Stern pointed to how Barovsky asked many questions of staff during the meeting as proof the item was vague.

Wagner could not be reached for comment on why he voted in opposition.

Also at the meeting, Environmental and Building Safety Manager Craig George said he has been working with the civil engineer who built the septic system at Point Dume Village regarding an odor. He said the odor is coming from the mall’s septic system, but there is no problem with overflow.

“The system is actually working very well,” George said. “It’s just the odors that are emanating [that are the problem].”

The council also voted to form two 12-person blue ribbon advisory committees regarding certain controversial topics in the city. One committee will discuss the creation of a viewshed ordinance. A majority of those who voted in the April election approved a ballot question asking if they wanted the city to create such an ordinance. The other committee will discuss the potential municipal purchase of a 9.8-acre property on the north side of Pacific Coast Highway off Heathercliff Road. City officials have said the site could be used for a City Hall, library, teen and senior center and other facilities.

Two Bonsall Drive residents spoke to the council in opposition to forming a committee about the potential land purchase. They are against rezoning the residential area to allow for the city facilities.

“To rezone this property opens the door for all adjacent properties to ask for commercial zoning,” said Mary Buchanan, who said her backyard borders the property. “While I don’t wish to be one who says ‘not in my backyard,’ I find no good reason to accommodate the city by changing the zoning.”

Each council member will make two selections for each blue ribbon committee next month. Both committees will also have two at-large members, one from the west end of Malibu and one from the east end, who will be selected by the council as a whole. Applications for the committees can be found on the city’s Web site at www.ci.malibu.ca.us under the “News Briefs” section.