Atascadero council confirms costs for weed-abatement work after inspections
Loading...
Summary
City council voted unanimously to adopt a resolution confirming costs for weed and vegetation abatement after staff reported inspections of more than 11,000 parcels; contractors completed abatement on 44 parcels and 81 were tagged for enforcement.
The Atascadero City Council voted unanimously to adopt a resolution confirming costs to recover the city’s expenses for weed and vegetation abatement after staff described this year’s inspection and enforcement process.
Fire Division staff told the council that about 11,198 parcels were inspected in March 2025 and that the city mailed 6,382 notices in April — roughly 110 more notices than the previous year. After a June 1 compliance deadline, crews identified 81 parcels that still required abatement; contractors removed fuel on 44 of those parcels, the presentation said. Council approved staff’s recommendation to confirm the abatement costs so the charges can be placed on property tax rolls.
City Battalion Chief Dave Banson outlined the four-step process used this year: inspections, mailed notices, reinspections and enforcement abatement where owners failed to comply. Banson said staff attempted door-to-door contact before ordering contractor work; vacant lots were posted with abatement placards. He told council that the number of notices rose in part because new inspection tools and a revised inspection workflow improved detection.
Council members pressed staff on the size and reason for some high invoices. Councilmember Peake identified the largest parcel as nearly four acres; Banson explained abatement charges reflect lot size and contractor hours on the site. Banson and staff said parcel characteristics — slopes, multiple sub-parcels tied to a single commercial property, and time on site — drive variance in cost.
One attendee, Jeff Hosland, told council he supports the program and said the city’s inspection documentation helped with his insurance. Councilmember Newsom made the motion to adopt the draft resolution confirming abatement costs; Councilmember Funk seconded. The vote was unanimous.
Costs and the abatement process are intended to remove hazardous fuels, lower wildfire risk, and place the cost burden on noncompliant property owners rather than the general taxpayer. Staff recommended continued outreach and noted that the city’s contractor workload and hourly rates determine billed amounts.
Council did not amend the resolution and asked staff to provide further parcel-level details if council members requested them later.
