Alameda County committee hears revised fireworks ordinance; appeals to go to neutral hearing officer

The Alameda County Unincorporated Services Committee was briefed on a revised draft fireworks ordinance that would replace appeals to the Board of Zoning Adjustments with a contracted neutral hearing officer and adjust enforcement timelines and fines.

Sgt. Curtis Imperial of the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office told the committee the county attorney determined the BZA lacks jurisdiction to act as the appeals body for this ordinance, which prompted the change to a neutral hearing officer ‘contracted or appointed by the county of Alameda.’ He said county counsel also advised that statutory limits require the maximum administrative fine for a third or subsequent violation to be $2,000 rather than the $2,500 previously proposed. Imperial said the draft adds a definition for a neutral hearing officer and retains the appeal timelines but routes further court review to the Alameda County Superior Court under California Government Code section 53069.4.

Supervisor Tam and others pressed for details about the appeals process. Tam asked whether the ordinance is a civil administrative violation; Imperial confirmed it is, and that an appellant unhappy with a hearing officer’s decision may file a petition for review in the Alameda County Superior Court. Committee members also asked whether testimony presented to a hearing officer would be under oath; Imperial said county counsel would confirm whether a hearing officer may require oath or sworn testimony in that forum.

Public commenters from San Lorenzo and Cherryland urged the county to move the ordinance forward in time for the July 4 holiday. Diane, a Municipal Advisory Council member, said, “If we can have something in play before July, I think that would be best.” Michael Fried, a former MAC member, asked whether citations attach to a venue or to individuals, noting enforcement design would affect how often citations could be issued within a 24-hour window. Imperial said the citation is applied to the responsible party hosting the event, and staff will clarify whether and how responsibility transfers if a property owner leaves and others use the site.

Imperial said there would be no cost to appeal at the neutral hearing-officer level; costs to pursue litigation at the Superior Court would depend on the court’s fees and procedures. He also said the ordinance includes a 24-hour limit so that no person can be cited more than once in that period; repeat contacts and supplemental reports would be documented by deputies to support subsequent enforcement.

Staff said a board letter with responses to the committee’s earlier questions and the updated draft ordinance will be placed on the Board of Supervisors agenda for a first reading on May 12, 2026, and a second reading on June 2, 2026, with an anticipated effective date of July 2, 2026, in time for Independence Day enforcement considerations.

The committee did not take formal action but directed staff to clarify remaining questions—particularly about oath for hearing officers and whether responsibility attaches to venues or individuals—before the ordinance is advanced to the full board.