Ordinance 2875 and Staff ReportCITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO. 2875
New Series
AMENDING ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 1-
5.1 (MISDEMEANORS; INFRACTIONS; GENERAL PENALTIES; CONTINUING
VIOLATIONS) OF SECTION 1 -5 (PENALTY PROVISIONS ENFORCEMENT),
OF CHAPTER I (GENERAL), TO SET MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTIES
FOR SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS.
WHEREAS, it is the purpose of the City Council in enacting this Ordinance to promote and
protect the existence of adequate housing facilities, to provide for the maintenance of the minimum
requirements for the protection of life, limb, property, safety and welfare of the general public and the
owners and occupants of residential buildings and to eliminate substandard housing. In furtherance
of this purpose, the City Council enacts mandatory minimum penalties for those violations by property
owners or entities who violate the Alameda Housing Code (Section 13 -7 et seq) and thereby fail to
provide the required minimum standards of habitability for residential housing as defined under this
Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Alameda that:
f. Notwithstanding the maximum penalty prescribed by subsection 1- 5.1(b), for any
violation of the Alameda Housing Code (Section 13 -7 et seq) of the Alameda Municipal Code, the
following mandatory minimum penalty shall be imposed:
(1) Upon conviction for a first violation, a fine of no less than Three Hundred and Fifty
Dollars ($350) shall be imposed for each count;
(2) Upon conviction for a second violation within five (5) years of the first conviction,
a fine of no less than Six Hundred Dollars ($600) shall be imposed for each count;
(3) Upon conviction of a third violation or any subsequent violation within five (5)
years of the prior conviction, a fine of no less than Eight Hundred and Fifty Hundred Dollars ($850)
shall be imposed for each count.
Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is,
for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Alameda
hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, clause or
phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses
and phrases be declared unconstitutional.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the expiration
of thirty (30) days from the date of its final passage.
Attest:
t__4114/5-;
City Clerk
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly
adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in an adjourned regular meeting
assembled on the 5th day of February, 2002 by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr, and
Mayor Appezzato - 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City
this 6th day of February, 2002.
1-04rei WOA
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
City of Alameda
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
From: Robert L. Wonder
Assistant City Manager,
Operations
Date: January 7, 2002
Re: Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection
1 -5.1 (Misdemeanors; infractions; General Penalty; Continuing
Violations) of Section 1 -5 (Penalty Provisions, Enforcement), of Chapter I
(General), to set Mandatory Minimum Penalties for Specific Violations
Background
As the Council is aware, there are some landlords who maintain their rental units in substandard
and unsafe conditions. This jeopardizes the health and safety of tenants, has led to an increase
in complaints, and has resulted in more aggressive code enforcement activities where these
situations are called to our attention.
Existing penalties in the Alameda Housing Code do not create a sufficient deterrent for repeat
and/or long - standing offenders. Under the Alameda Municipal Code Section 1.5.1(b), the
criminal penalty for a violation of the Housing Code is a fine up to $1000 or six months in jail,
or both, for a misdemeanor. The Court has the discretion to impose any punishment (or no
punishment) within these parameters. Historically, the criminal fines imposed even for
extensive and long- standing violations of the Alameda Housing Code have been
disproportionately low and provide little, if any real incentive for a slum landlord to correct
substandard housing. What is being recommended here would correct that situation.
The proposed mandatory minimum criminal ordinance would apply only to violations of the
Alameda Housing Code; it is intended to eliminate the court's discretion to impose low, non-
existent or suspended criminal fines and thereby create a deterrent to repeat and recalcitrant
offenders of the Alameda Housing Code. The ordinance provides an additional tool to those
currently available to abate and prevent serious and continuing Housing Code violations.
Discussion/Analysis
The proposed Mandatory Minimum Criminal Penalty Ordinance requires that upon conviction
of a violation of the Alameda Housing Code (which is a misdemeanor), a fine of no less than
$350 dollars is imposed for each count charged and proved. A second conviction within five
years of the first conviction would result in a fine of no less than $600 for each count, and a
Re: Intro of Ordinances #4 -F CC
1 -15 -02
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service
Honorable Mayor and
Councilmembers
January 7, 2002
Page 2
third conviction within five years of the second conviction would result in a fine of no less than
$850 for each count. In no event would the misdemeanor fine be greater than the $1000
maximum per count currently set by the Alameda Municipal Code.
The Mandatory Minimum Criminal Penalty Ordinance only sets a minimum fine for each count
in which the violator is found guilty. The Court has the discretion to impose a greater fine, the
purpose of the ordinance is to eliminate the Court's unfettered discretion to impose little or no
fine. It is often more cost effective for slum landlords to simply pay small fines and continue to
maintain substandard housing.
The municipalities (including San Francisco's 13- year -old minimum penalty ordinance) that
have adopted similar minimum penalty ordinances have reported that these ordinances have
been highly successful in combating slum landlords and, in addition to the deterrence effect,
help recoup the often relatively expensive costs of investigating, monitoring and enforcing
minimum Housing Code standards. Minimum penalty ordinances have been consistently
upheld as an appropriate function of the local legislative bodies that enact them. Moreover,
local governments have a compelling need to regulate substandard rental housing conditions
and are in a far better position than the courts to determine what steps are required to ensure
adequate housing.
Minimum criminal penalties are a City's legitimate device toward securing obedience to the
Housing Code requirements through penalties. Criminal penalties may have a punitive or
deterrent aspect, but their primary purpose is to secure obedience to statutes and regulations
imposed to assure important public policy considerations and objectives, especially those of
ensuring the health and safety of the City's residents and preserving our housing stock.
Budget Consideration
There would be no additional cost for Implementation of the Mandatory Minimum Criminal
Penalty Ordinance. The City receives a percentage of any criminal fine imposed. These
recoveries would help offset the enforcement and investigation costs incurred by the City, often
over a period of 2 or 3 years or more. It is typically these long- standing cases that result in legal
action and occur only when the City has exhausted its extensive attempts to gain voluntary
compliance.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Council adopt the proposed ordinance setting mandatory minimum
penalties for criminal violations of the Alameda Housing Code.
Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service