PISMO BEACH COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item #12.C
SUBJECT/TITLE:
CODE COMPLIANCE UPDATE AND DIRECTION
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a report from staff on current Code Compliance practices and provide direction on the following policy items:
1. Enforcement priorities for Code Compliance cases.
2. Types of violations that should be pursued on a proactive basis, versus a complaint basis.
3. Preferred approach to collecting unpaid fines associated with Code Compliance cases.
4. Dollar amount threshold, and other factors, that determine whether collections activities should be pursued.
BACKGROUND:
On November 3, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution R-2015-103, establishing a part-time Code Compliance staff position. During consideration of the part-time position, the Council directed that enforcement of the Pismo Beach Municipal Code (the Code, or PBMC) be conducted on a complaint-based program. Under a complaint-based program, enforcement is initiated upon formal complaints to pursue compliance. At that time, the Council also identified several items to pursue in a proactive manner, with short-term rental (STR) violations and unpermitted active construction being the primary focus of proactive enforcement.
The part-time position was appointed in November 2015, but has at times been unfilled due to staffing challenges. Since the beginning of 2022, compliance efforts focused on addressing roughly 45 to 50 pre-existing open cases, as well as an average of 15 cases opened each month and 6 complaints received weekly. These complaints typically relate to parking issues, unpermitted construction, overgrown vegetation, and STR violations.
With continually increasing community expectations for the City’s enforcement efforts, the City Council made the decision to support and prioritize the Code Compliance program and authorized the creation of a full-time Code Enforcement Officer position beginning in Fiscal Year 2023. While a recruitment is currently underway to fill this position, creation of the position presents an opportunity to revisit existing unresolved cases, and potentially pursue additional case types proactively.
This report will provide an overview of current Code Compliance practices and explore four program areas where staff seeks Council’s direction.
12.C-1Council Agenda 9-20-2022
Current Code Compliance Process
General
Since January 2022, 106 new code enforcement cases have been opened, while 66 cases have been closed. In the same timeframe in 2021, 18 total cases were opened.
New complaints are received via phone, email, and the City’s customer service request application, Pismo Pulse. Typically, once a complaint is verified as a formal complaint including contact information, a site visit is conducted by the Code Enforcement Officer.
After the reported issue is verified in the field, the Code Enforcement Officer contacts the violating party, either in person or by providing a courtesy letter to the property owner or business in violation of the Code. The courtesy letter establishes contact, is an attempt to reach voluntary communication, and begins the process of compliance prior to citation.
The City’s goal is always to obtain compliance if possible. The letter identifies the apparent violations, gives a 30-day timeframe for response, and provides staff contact information for follow-up. Should the courtesy contact go without voluntary compliance, a Notice of Order for abatement issues or Notice of Violation for Code infractions is sent by both standard and certified mail. A 15-day follow-up may be sent if communication has taken place with the violating party and efforts to resolve the matter are in process. In cases of no response or change, an Administrative Citation may be issued.
Short-Term Rentals
Regarding STRs, Code Compliance staff proactively monitor the City’s third-party tracking software, Rentalscape, to identify unpermitted rentals and enforce the City’s primary residency requirements, good neighbor policies, and parking requirements. For quality- of-life items, compliance originates with a resident complaint or Rentalscape report. The nature of the complaint is checked against PBMC requirements for the rental. If a violation is identified, a phone call to the responsible party is made on the business day received.
A letter is also sent advising of steps necessary for compliance, and establishing a timeframe to either abate, or receive an Administrative Citation. As directed by the City Council, a moratorium on the issuance of new STR licenses is currently in place, during which time staff is evaluating potential changes to the City’s STR regulations to address Council and community concerns.
Active Construction
On the topic of active construction, these violations may be discovered during site visits or as a result of citizen complaints. Contact is made with personnel on site and a stop- work order is issued if the scope of construction warrants a Building Permit or land use entitlement. A permit must then be obtained within 30 days with an additional investigation fee added. Otherwise, a Code Compliance case is opened, and the standard Code Compliance process is followed. Lack of progress toward obtaining proper permits initiates the Administrative Citation process.
Administration
These processes are overseen by Community Development Department management, namely the Building Official and Planning Manager, under direction of the Community Development Director. Each new case represents an average of 7 to 10 hours spent on
12.C-2Council Agenda 9-20-2022
investigation, documentation, and communication with the parties to the case. An average of 4 new cases and 3 citizen complaints per week adds up to approximately 70 hours of work per week. With the Council’s support for a full-time Code Compliance Officer position, the City has an opportunity to expand Code Compliance’s role within the community. The investment in a full-time officer will allow the City to keep a better and more consistent pace with the incoming requests and add additional active compliance items as directed.
Priorities for Enforcement; Proactive Versus Complaint-Based Enforcement
Considerations
Due to the amount of time necessary for administration of Code Compliance processes by the Code Enforcement Officer and other staff, it is important to define the types of Code violations to be proactively pursued. Increased compliance efforts will increase the time required of staff within other departments due to associated increases records requests, administrative appeal hearings, potential legal actions, and fine collections activities. Furthermore, cases involving an immediate threat to life, health, or safety receive priority attention, which can delay resolution of cases not involving such concerns.
The most common items currently addressed include the following issues, in order of approximate frequency, as well as priorities the Council and Pismo Beach community have identified:
• Completed unpermitted construction
• Short-term rentals
• Active construction
• Citizen complaints
• Public right-of-way obstruction, such as sidewalk displays • Off-site sign violations/banners
• Overgrown vegetation
Policy Question #1: Code Compliance Program Priorities
Staff seeks Council direction on the City’s priorities for addressing Code Compliance cases.
Staff recommends that the investigation of apparent violations be prioritized as follows:
Substandard buildings and immediate life safety concerns STR permit complaints and unpermitted STR operations identified through the active monitoring program
Active unpermitted construction
Sign violations
Other complaint-driven issues
12.C-3Council Agenda 9-20-2022
Policy Question #2: Proactive versus Complaint-Based Enforcement Staff seeks Council direction on the types of violations that should be pursued on a proactive basis, versus a complaint basis.
Staff recommends that staff undertake proactive enforcement activities relating to unpermitted STR operation, active unpermitted construction, off-site signage and banners, and substandard buildings presenting a risk to the health and safety of residents and visitors. Staff recommends that the remainder of potential cases follow the current complaint-based system and require an official complaint in writing, complete with contact information.
Citation Collection Policies
Considerations
The City’s primary goal with regard to Code Compliance is to obtain voluntary compliance with the Code, and the creation of a full-time Code Compliance staff position allows for the expansion of these compliance efforts. However, any increase in Code Compliance efforts will likely result in an increase in related fines. With an increase in fines, the matter of fine collection will become important to maintaining the effectiveness of the program and its impact within the community. Current outstanding fines range from a few hundred dollars for cases that were quickly resolved, to thousands of dollars for long-term violations, and nonpayment is a common occurrence across the range. PBMC Section
1.24.140 outlines the administrative citation system as well as potential collection techniques. Additionally, PBMC Section 1.24.020 allows for the City’s discretion in the use of administrative enforcement remedies. Some of the current highest outstanding citations include fines for unpermitted commercial signage and outdoor dining at $6,300 and $3,300, respectively, and outstanding fines of $3,100 for multiple unpermitted projects on a single residential parcel.
There are several options for fine collection, including liens, third-party collections agencies, small claims court cases, or alternative methods. One approach that may prove effective for residential properties may prove ineffective for a business owner operating out of another party’s property with ownership by a potential trust or LLC. At the same time, certain approaches to collecting fees may result in costs of staff time greater than the fine being collected, while others may prove to be unnecessary based on the case being resolved.
Policy Question #3: Methods for Collecting Unpaid Fines Staff seeks Council direction on the approach that should be utilized to collect unpaid fines associated with Code Compliance cases.
Staff recommends that the City Attorney’s office be utilized to seek payment for citations with unpaid fines that are more than 30 days overdue, and that a third-party collection agency be utilized for fines that remain unpaid 30 days after the City Attorney’s contact.
In general, the City would likely receive approximately one-half the fines collected by the
12.C-4Council Agenda 9-20-2022
collection agency, but this arrangement would significantly reduce the expenditure of staff time and resources.
Policy Question #4: Thresholds for Pursuing Collections Staff seeks Council direction on the dollar amount thresholds at which collections activities should be pursued, reduced, or waived, assuming compliance is achieved.
Based on current outstanding citations, staff recommends collections activities be pursued as outlined in Policy Question #3 above for citations totaling more than $500.
Additionally, pursuant to PBMC Subsection 1.24.020.C., staff recommends that the City Manager be granted the discretion to adjust or waive fines in cases where compliance has been achieved or is underway. This will allow the flexibility to achieve debt collection for significant fines while allowing the Code Compliance Officer to focus on the cases themselves.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The City Council has invested in the quality of life for the community through the creation of a full-time Code Compliance Officer position. Staff recommends the City Council provide direction on the four policy questions posed above to ensure the program is operated consistent with the Council’s expectations. Staff will return at a subsequent meeting with a Resolution memorializing the Council’s direction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact as a result of this item. The Council’s direction with respect to fine collection activities, as well as fluctuations in the number of Code violations that result in administrative penalties, may result in a future fiscal impact, which is unknown at this time.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not make recommendations on priorities or process; continue current Code Compliance practices.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Prepared by: Ian Livingston, Building Official Meeting Date: September 20, 2022 Submitted by: Matthew Downing, Community Development Director City Manager Approval:
12.C-5Council Agenda 9-20-2022