Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee approves bill allowing nuisance-abatement liens and special assessments with due-process safeguards
Summary
Senate Bill 757 would permit cities and counties to use nuisance-abatement liens or special assessments to collect the costs of abating hazards that endanger public health or safety, subject to notice, cure periods and hardship waivers.
Senate Bill 757 would authorize the legislative body of a city or county to establish procedures allowing nuisance-abatement liens or special assessments to collect abatement and administrative costs for violations that endanger public health or safety, the bill's author said on June 19.
The bill's author described the proposal as a local enforcement "toolbox" to recover costs when property owners repeatedly fail to address dangerous or unsanitary conditions. The bill, as amended in committee, included a 60-day cure period, a hardship-waiver process for owners who make good-faith efforts to comply, and a requirement that funds recovered be reinvested in housing code enforcement and support programs for low-income homeowners.
Carly Shelby, testifying for contract cities including Oakland and Compton, said chronic nuisance properties in historically underserved neighborhoods pose persistent health and safety hazards and that the bill provides a timely and equitable enforcement option for jurisdictions with limited legal resources.
The ACLU California Action opposed the bill. Carmen Nicole Cox, representing the organization, said administrative liens and special assessments risk displacement and racialized wealth extraction and argued the bill lacks neutral judicial review; she said existing mechanisms already allow collection of fines and that the proposed change would likely fall hardest on low-income homeowners.
Committee members discussed due-process and hardship concerns; the author responded the bill maintains notice and cure processes and added explicit hardship-waiver language. After quorum was achieved, the subcommittee recorded the measure as passed with a roll call recorded as yes: 7, no: 0.
