Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Moreno Valley council authorizes search for judicial receiver at Siggoia complex
Summary
In closed session March 17, the council authorized the city attorney to seek a judicial appointment of a receiver to address multiple code and state housing‑code violations at the Siggoia apartment complex; the vote was 4–0 with one member absent.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Moreno Valley City Council on March 17 voted to authorize the city attorney to seek a judicial appointment of a receiver for the Siggoia apartment complex, citing multiple municipal code and state housing‑code violations. City Attorney Steven Kintton reported the action after the meeting's closed session and said the council voted 4–0, with Council Member Bernard absent, to proceed.
The council took its action under the litigation provisions announced before recessing to closed session. "There was reportable action on one of the two potential initiation litigation items and that is... the city council voted 4‑0... to authorize the city attorney to seek the judicial appointment of a receiver to address the multiple code violations and state housing code violations at the Siggoia apartment complex," Kintton told the council when the meeting reconvened.
Why it matters: a judicially appointed receiver is a court‑supervised official who can be empowered to manage a property, perform repairs, and ensure code compliance when property owners have failed to correct hazardous conditions. The move signals the city's intent to use a legal remedy to restore habitable, code‑compliant conditions at the complex rather than relying solely on administrative enforcement.
Council took the action after identifying two closed‑session items: a significant exposure to litigation related to the general plan update and potential initiation of litigation items; the receiver authorization was the only item that produced reportable action. The city attorney gave no further operational detail in open session beyond the authorizing vote.
Next steps: City staff and the city attorney will proceed with the legal steps required to seek a receiver in the appropriate court. The council did not announce a timeline for those filings or relief measures the city may seek through the receiver process.

