To: Board of Supervisors
From: Planning and Building Department
Agenda Section: Consent
Vote Requirement: Majority
SUBJECT:
title
Summarily Approve Nuisance Abatement Assessment of Two Properties
end
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Recommendation
That the Board of Supervisors:
1. Summarily approve the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessment for 16CEU-64 on the property located at 240 Central Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537 (APN 306-033-003-000) which is in violation of various Humboldt County Codes in the amount of $12,137.33 and in accordance with Title III, Division 5, Chapter 2, section 351-21 Summary Approval of Proposed Assessment; and
2. Summarily approve the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessment for CE22-1865 on the property located at 6766 West Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537 (APN 306-024-004-000) which is in violation of various Humboldt County Codes in the amount of $37,705.54 and in accordance with Title III, Division 5, Chapter 2, section 351-21 Summary Approval of Proposed Assessment.
Body
STRATEGIC PLAN:
This action supports the following areas of your Board’s Strategic Plan.
Area of Focus: Safe & Healthy Communities
Strategic Plan Category: 1001 -Support and sustain partnerships between public safety and partner agencies to enhance public safety in our communities
DISCUSSION:
Executive Summary
The Board is being asked to summarily approve two proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessments at 240 Central Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537 and 6766 West Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537, respectively. Both assessments are for properties owned by Gerald McGuire.
The amount of the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessments equals the actual costs of abatement and staff time. Administrative civil penalties are not being sought in these cases. The approval of the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessment will repay the county for the actual costs of abating the public nuisance and correcting the code violations on this property. At this point, there is not a rationale for a reduction or elimination of the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessment because it is based on expenses already paid.
HCC section 351-21 states “if an objection to the proposed assessment is not filed by any Owner, Beneficial Owner, Occupier or any other person in charge or control of the affected property within ten (10) calendar days after service of the Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors shall summarily approve the proposed assessment without holding a Cost Recovery Hearing.”
Based upon these factors, staff recommend that your Board confirm the proposed Nuisance Abatement Assessment.
Upon summary approval of the Nuisance Abatement Assessment, a Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment Lien will be served on the properties. This notice will 45 calendar days for the assessment to be paid before the recording of the Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment Lien.
Pursuant to HCC section 351-24 after the Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment Lien is recorded “the Humboldt County Auditor-Controller shall enter each Nuisance Abatement Assessment upon the affected Property on the Humboldt County Secured Tax Roll. The Nuisance Abatement Assessment shall continue until it is paid, together with interest at the legal maximum rate computed from the Imposition date until payment is received. The Nuisance Abatement Assessment may be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedures and sale in case of delinquency as provided for ordinary property taxes…”. The Nuisance Abatement Assessment shall also have the same force, effect and priority of a judgment lien governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure sections 697.310 et seq.
240 Central Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537 (APN 306-033-003-000)
The property owner was unable to abate the public nuisances occurring on the Property, and a county abatement was necessary to address all the public nuisances. In June of 2016, Code Enforcement Case 16CEU-64 was opened in response to a referral received from Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Branch Division of Environmental Health regarding nuisance conditions. The complaint alleged that junk vehicles were being stored on the property and trash/solid waste was being stored on the property improperly, see Exhibit A.
A current grant deed was obtained for the property through the Humboldt County Recorder’s Office, which listed Gerald McGuire (hereinafter referred to as the “Owner”) as the owner, see Exhibit B.
Code Enforcement Unit (CEU) staff noted on July 27, 2016, that similar conditions existed on the property that was in the referral from Environmental Health and initially was attempting to work with the owner to gain compliance. It was noted again on NNov. 11, 2017, that there was still a considerable number of junk vehicles and an accumulation of solid waste, indicating that compliance still had not been obtained.
On April 2, 2019, Code Enforcement responded to the Property to see if the conditions of the Property could be seen from the roadway or the sidewalk. Photographs were taken from the sidewalk of what was visible through the opening looking into the Property, see Exhibit C.
On April 12, 2019, a letter requesting the owner's consent for an inspection was mailed to the address listed on the Property Tax System. The letter stated that the owner had a right to refuse the request and if Code Enforcement didn't hear from the owner by April 22, 2019, that Code Enforcement would assume the Owner refused the request for a consent inspection.
Code Enforcement had not heard back from the owner regarding the request for consent inspection by April 22, 2019. Subsequently, an Inspection Warrant was applied for the property. Inspection Warrant Number SWl 900250, signed by Superior Court on May 1, 2019, see Exhibit D.
On May 6, 20I9 Code Enforcement posted a Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant, along with a copy of the Inspection Warrant at the property indicating an inspection on May 7, 2019, was approved by the Court, see Exhibit E.
On May 7, 2019, an inspection of the property was conducted pursuant to the Inspection Warrant. Violations confirmed included junk and/or inoperable vehicles (HCC 354-1), improper storage and removal of solid waste (HCC 521-4), and violation of Zoning Codes (HCC 311-10.1), see Exhibit F.
A Notice to Abate Nuisance and Notice of Violation and a Proposed Administrative Civil Penalty were posted on the property on July 8, 2019, see Exhibit G.
On July 18, 2019, the Owner submitted a Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing Request Form and an Administrative Civil Penalty Appeal Hearing Request Form to appeal CEU's determination, see Exhibit H.
Due to the Covid 19 Pandemic, Administrative Appeal Hearings were postponed. During this time the owner had also expressed interest in entering a "Compliance Agreement" to extend the timeline for compliance and work with the County on correcting the violations on the property. A Compliance Agreement was not entered into and a Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing and an Administrative Civil Penalty Appeal Hearing was scheduled for Sept. 9, 2022.
On Sept. 9, 2022, the Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing and Administrative Civil Penalty Appeal Hearing were held by the California Hearing Officers, LLP. On Nov. 8, 2022, a Finding of Nuisance and Order of Abatement and a Finding of Violation and Order Imposing Administrative Civil Penalty were issued. In summary, the findings from the hearings upheld the Notice to Abate Nuisance and Notice of Violation and Proposed Administrative Civil Penalty, and ordered the Owner to abate the nuisance within 30 days from service of the findings, along with imposing an administrative civil penalty, see Exhibit I.
On Dec. 12, 2022, Code Enforcement attempted to contact the owner by telephone to inform the need to conduct an inspection, to confirm compliance with the Hearing Officer's finding and orders. The owner did not answer, and a voicemail requesting the owner to call back was left.
On Dec. 19, 2022, the owner came into the Planning and Building Department and was provided the Investigator’s contact information.
On Dec. 27, 2022, Code Enforcement received an email from staff advising that the owner left a voicemail on the main Code Enforcement line.
On Dec. 28, 2022, the owner was called but did not answer, another voicemail was left.
As of Dec. 29, 2022, Code Enforcement had not heard back from the owner. A formal letter was drafted to be mailed to the owner requesting a consent inspection. The letter indicated that if Code Enforcement did not hear back and receive consent by Jan. 9, 2023, that staff would assume he denied a request for an inspection, see Exhibit J.
On Dec. 29, 2022, the owner was contacted by telephone. He said he would not be available to meet until Jan. 4, 2023. On Jan. 4, 2023, there was a large storm, and it was not advised to be traveling in the conditions. Attempts to contact Mr. McGuire 3 times on that day were unsuccessful.
On Jan. 5, 2023, Code Enforcement attempted to contact the owner again by telephone and did not get an answer. Additionally, on Jan. 9, 2023, attempts were made to contact him by telephone numerous with no answer.
As of Jan. 24, 2023, Code Enforcement had not been contacted by the owner. I did not hear back from him by Jan. 9, 2023, which is the date that requested he contact by in the formal letter.
On Jan. 26, 2023 an Inspection Warrant was submitted and approved by Superior Court Judge, see Exhibit K.
On Feb. 2, 2023 the Inspection Warrant was served and the inspection took place. The property still had items of solid waste and junk/inoperable vehicle parts, along with still storing miscellaneous other items on the property with the travel trailer and boat/trailer. The property was not in compliance with the Hearing Officer’s notices.
On May 4, 2023 a Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance was served, see Exhibit L.
On June 5, 2023 Code Enforcement met with Wahlund Construction to obtain an estimate for abatement.
On Aug. 24, 2023 Civil Penalty Assessment was served. This notice had been summarily approved by the Board of Supervisors on May 23, 2023, see Exhibit M.
On Nov. 20, 2023, the Notice of Administrative Civil Penalty Lien was recorded.
On Nov. 20, 2023, a Letter of Intent to Conduct Public Nuisance Abatement was mailed, see Exhibit N.
On Dec. 13, 2023, the Inspection Warrant and Order of Abatement were received back and approved by Superior Court Judge. This was served on Dec. 14, 2023, see Exhibit O.
The abatement was started on Dec. 20, 2023, and completed on Dec. 21, 2023, see Exhibit P.
On July 23, 2024, Code Enforcement served a Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment on the Property for the abatement work done to date. No request for a Cost Recovery Hearing was received.
Pursuant to HCC section 351-16 a Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment was served for $12,137.33 which included $3,008.20 in costs paid to KH McKenny Construction to perform the abatement, $8,585.13 for administrative costs and $544.00 for attorney’s fees incurred on this enforcement action, see Exhibit Q.
6766 West Avenue, Fields Landing, CA 95537 (APN 306-024-004-000)
The property owner was unable to abate the public nuisances occurring on the Property, and a county abatement was necessary to address all the public nuisances. On June 28, 2022, Code Enforcement Case CE22-1865 was opened. On Dec. 29, 2022 a formal letter was mailed mail to the owner notifying him of the allegations of the complaint and that CEU had opened a new case on the property. The letter also stated that an inspection of the property would need to be conducted to confirm or refute the allegations and CEU was asking for the owner to consent to an inspection of the property. Additionally, the letter advised that if CEU did not hear from the owner by Jan. 9, 2023, that CEU would assume that the owner denied the request for a consent Inspection, see Exhibit R.
On Dec. 29, 2022, the owner was contacted by telephone. He said he wouldn't be available to meet until January 4, 2023. 35. On Jan. 4, 2023, there was a large storm and it was not advised to be traveling in the conditions. Attempts to contact Mr. McGuire three times on that day were unsuccessful.
On Jan. 5, 2023, Code Enforcement attempted to contact the Owner again by telephone and did not get an answer. Additionally, on Jan. 9, 2023, attempts were made to contact him by telephone numerous with no answer.
On Jan. 19, 2023, photos were taken from the sidewalk/roadway. It appeared most of the property was covered with miscellaneous items including salvaged wood products, kitchen chairs, and toilets, see Exhibit S.
The Property Owner did not make contact by telephone, in person, regular mail, or email since the last telephone conversation on Dec. 29, 2022, and there was no contact in response to the formal letter, Code Enforcement applied for and obtained an Inspection Warrant, approved by Superior Court Judge, dated Jan. 25, 2023, see Exhibit T.
On Jan. 30, 2023, the Owner came into the Planning and Building Department, and was personally served with a Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant, along with a copy of the Inspection Warrant, see Exhibit U.
The Letter of lntent to Serve Inspection Warrant informed the Owner that Code Enforcement intended to serve the Inspection Warrant and conduct an inspection of the property on Feb. 2, 2023. On Feb. 2, 2023, at about 10:00 a.m. Code Enforcement responded to the property, along with Plan Checker, Micah Mathieson, and Building Inspector, John Backman, with the Humboldt County Planning and Building Department Building Division. The owner was at the property upon staff’s arrival and let them onto the property. Photos were taken throughout the inspection, see Exhibit V.
The following Humboldt County Code violations were observed on the property during the inspection as it related to the complaints: HCC 371-2 - Maintaining a Junkyard, HCC 521-1, 521-4, 511-12 - Improper Storage and Removal of Solid Waste, and HCC 31 l-l 0.1 - Property Use in Violation of Zoning Codes (in violation of zoning code HCC 313-43.1. where no accessory uses are allowed without a primary use. In this case the property is zoned Residential Single Family with the principally permitted use being single family residential.
Since there is no residence on the property, accessory uses such as storage and accessory structures are not allowed. Additionally, the Building Division determined that the materials leftover from the previous demolition were not of building quality and could not be used for any new construction for a single-family residence. Micah Mathieson completed a report to documents his observations, see Exhibit W.
The violations observed on the property constituted a public nuisance and subsequently a Notice to Abate and Notice of Violation and Proposed Administrative Civil Penalty were served on Feb. 28, 2023, see Exhibit X.
The NTA and NOV allow the owner to request a Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing and/or an Administrative Civil Penalty Appeal hearing within 10 days of the service of the notices. Code Enforcement did not receive any appeal request by the Owner within in the timeframe provided.
Additionally, the notices allow 10 days from the service of the notice to abate the public nuisance and bring the property into compliance or the county would have jurisdiction to abate the nuisance. On May 2, 2023, more than two months after service of the notices, Code Enforcement responded to the property and viewed it from the sidewalk. The corrective actions needed to abate the nuisance had not been completed.
Determination was made that a county abatement of the property would be needed to bring the-property-into compliance. On May 3, 2023, Code Enforcement mailed a Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance. On May 4, 2023, the letter was posted at the property to inform the owner of the county's intent of a county abatement. The letter also explained that an inspection of the property would need to be conducted with a hired contractor for the contractor to provide an estimate for the abatement. The letter requested consent for the inspection with the contractor and stated that if CEU did not hear back from the Owner by May 15, 2023, CEU would assume the Owner denied his consent for the inspection, see Exhibit Y.
On May 10, 2023, the owner came into the Planning and Building Department and discussed the inspection request. He verbally consented to an inspection, and it was scheduled for June 5, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
On June 1, 2023, Code Enforcement attempted to contact the Owner by telephone to confirm the scheduled inspection the following week, it went to voicemail, and a message was left.
On June 5, 2023, Code Enforcement arrived at the property with the contractor to conduct the inspection. The owner met staff on the street and asked questions regarding the inspection. At that point he rescinded his consent for an inspection at the property and said he did not want staff to conduct the inspection.
On June 28, 2023, Inspection Warrant was applied for through the Superior Court of California. On June 29, 2023, a Letter of lntent to Serve Inspection Warrant was posted at the Property with a copy of the signed Inspection Warrant Attached. The letter stated intentions of serving the Inspection Warrant and conduct the inspection on July 5, 2023, see Exhibit Z.
On July 5, 2023, Code Enforcement responded to the property with the contractor and conducted
the inspection. The owner was present during the inspection. Photos were taken throughout the property, see Exhibit AA.
The inspection confirmed the violations still existed as listed in the NTA and NOV. After the inspection on July 5, 2023, the Owner was still unsuccessful at obtaining a Building Permit through the Building Department, and the Planning Department was moving forward with revoking the owner's Coastal Development Permit for the property. The owner requested a hearing before the Board of Supervisors and on Sept. 26, 2023, the Board of Supervisors voted to revoke the owner’s Coastal Development Permit. After the Board of Supervisor's meeting on Sept. 26, 2023, revoking the owner’s Coastal Development Permit, Director John Ford discussed the conditions of the property with the owner and provided the Owner until Oct. 26, 2023, to bring the property into compliance with the NTA and NOV or the county would move forward with abating the property. Following Director Ford’s conversation with the owner, the Planning and Building Department mailed Mr. McGuire a letter outlining the conversation and timeframe, see Exhibit BB.
The letter explained that Code Enforcement would schedule an appointment with the Owner on or after Oct. 26, 2023, to review the site conditions. On Oct. 12, 2023, Code Enforcement mailed a letter first class and certified requesting consent for an inspection the week of Oct. 30, 2023, after the Oct. 26, 2023, deadline, to confirm compliance. The letter stated if Code Enforcement did not hear back from the Owner by Oct. 24, 2023, Code Enforcement would assume he had denied request for a consent inspection, see Exhibit CC.
As of Oct. 23, 2023, Code Enforcement had not heard from the owner. Phone contact was made Oct. 23, 2023, and the owner was asked if he would consent to an inspection on Oct. 30, 2023. He also informed him that CEU would need to bring a contractor onto the property to provide an estimate for a County Abatement. He said he was still trying to remove the items from the property, and he would know more by the deadline day of Oct. 26, 2023. He said he would contact Code Enforcement that day and decide whether to consent to an inspection. On Oct. 26, 2023, numerous attempts were made to contact the Owner by telephone to see if he decided if he wanted to consent to an inspection or not. Each telephone call went to a voicemail that was full.
On Oct. 26, 2023, CEU received an email from Legal Office Business Manager, County Counsel, County of Humboldt. The email said that attorney, Michael Acosta (hereinafter referred to as Mr. Acosta), had just hand delivered a Petition for Writ of Mandate and Prohibition and Verified Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief; Ex Parte Application for a Restraining Order Prohibiting Seizure. The documents were not yet filed as they lacked the court stamp and case number, see Exhibit DD.
Additionally, on Oct. 27, 2023, CEU received an email from Deputy County Counsel, Thomas R. Chapin (hereinafter referred to as Mr. Chapin), County Counsel, County of Humboldt, advising their office had been served the filed Writ of Mandate and a hearing was scheduled for Jan. 19, 2024, at 1:45 p.m. The email also advised there was no stay or injunction at this time. The email contained an attachment of the filed document, file stamped October 27, 2023, Case Number: CV2301707, see Exhibit EE.
Due to not receiving consent to conduct an inspection of the Property by the Owner, Code Enforcement applied for and obtained an Inspection Warrant, Warrant No: SW2300756, Superior Court, County of Humboldt, on Oct. 30, 2023, see Exhibit FF.
On Oct. 31, 2023, Code Enforcement responded to the Property and posted a Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant with an attached copy of the Inspection Warrant. The letter explained that the intentions to serve the warrant and conduct the inspection on Nov. 2, 2023. Code Enforcement also mailed the Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant first class and certified to the Owner and the Owner's Attorney, Mr. Acosta, on Oct. 31, 2023, see Exhibit GG.
On Nov. 2, 2023, Code Enforcement responded to the property to conduct the Inspection and serve the Inspection Warrant. Photos were taken throughout the property to document the conditions. Observations included solid waste, junk, salvaged material, and numerous miscellaneous items being stored on the property still in violation of the Notices, Exhibit HH.
Due to no Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing being requested and the Owner not correcting the conditions within 10 days, the county had jurisdiction to conduct a County Abatement. Since a significant amount of time that had passed from the initial Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance, staff prepared a new Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance. This letter informed the Owner that an Inspection-Warrant and Order of Abatement was being drafted and sought, along with providing an estimated start date around the beginning of December, 2023 if the warrant was approved, see Exhibit II.
Due to the conditions on the property continuing to constitute a public nuisance it was determined by Director Ford, that a county abatement of the public nuisance would need to occur for the conditions to be abated. On Dec. 4, 2023, Mr. Chapin contacted me by telephone to inform me of an Ex Parte hearing that he attended that day regarding this Property. He informed me that the judge had ordered that no usable or buildable lumber or material shall be removed from the property prior to the Writ of Mandate hearing scheduled for Jan. 19, 2024, at 1:45 p.m. Mr. Chapin signed a Proposed Temporary Restraining Order, see Exhibit JJ.
On Dec. 6, 2023, Code Enforcement was included in an email sent by Mr. Chapin to Director
Ford which stated Mr. Chapin had set up a site visit at the Property with Mr. Acosta and the Owner for Monday, Dec. 11, 2023, at 1 p.m. The email stated that the visit was scheduled so the site could be walked with the Owner to determine which items will be removed for the abatement. Manager Beck, Mr. Chapin, Mr., Acosta, and the Owner met at the property and agreed which materials were to remain at the property.
On Dec. 11, 2023, Mr. Chapin emailed Mr. Acosta a summary of the site visit with the attached photos of the items that are to remain at the property, see Exhibit KK.
On Dec. 11, 2023, the Task Order was fully executed, see Exhibit LL.
The abatement was started on Dec. 19, 2023 and completed on Dec. 21, 2023. See attached photos, see Exhibit MM.
On July 23, 2024, Code Enforcement served a Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment on the Property for the abatement work done to date. No request for a Cost Recovery Hearing was received.
Pursuant to HCC section 351-16 a Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment was served for $37,705.54 which included $16,881.31 in costs paid to KH McKenny Construction to perform the abatement, $10,004.23 for administrative costs and $10,820 for attorney’s fees incurred on this enforcement action, see Exhibit NN.
SOURCE OF FUNDING:
General Fund, Code Enforcement (1100269) Nuisance Abatement (631130)
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The cost of preparing the cases and serving the notices has been included as administrative costs in accordance with established policies and code sections. Administrative staff costs associated with this assessment have been budgeted in the salaries and expenses of budget unit 1100-269 (Code Enforcement). The cost of the abatement was paid out of monies set aside for county abatements in the General Fund and transferred to budget unit 1100-269. With staff recommendation, there is minimal impact to the General Fund with this Board item.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
County Counsel
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Board could choose not to approve the Nuisance Abatement Assessment. However, this is not recommended because staff recommendations align with Title III, Division 5 of Humboldt County Code. By choosing this option there will be no reimbursement for the public funds spent to clean up and abate the public nuisance
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - DEH Referral
Exhibit B - Grant Deed
Exhibit C - Photos
Exhibit D - Inspection Warrant
Exhibit E - Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant
Exhibit F - Photos
Exhibit G - Notice to Abate Nuisance; Notice of Violation and a Proposed Administrative Civil Penalty
Exhibit H - Code Enforcement Appeal Hearing Request Form
Exhibit I - Finding of Nuisance and Order of Abatement; Finding of Violation and Order Imposing Administrative Civil Penalty
Exhibit J - Request for Inspection Consent
Exhibit K - Inspection Warrant
Exhibit L - Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance
Exhibit M - Notice of Administrative Penalty
Exhibit N - Letter of Intent to Conduct Public Nuisance Abatement
Exhibit O - Inspection Warrant and Order of Abatement
Exhibit P - Photos
Exhibit Q - Service of Nuisance Abatement Assessment
Exhibit R - Formal Letter
Exhibit S - Site Photos
Exhibit T - Inspection Warrant
Exhibit U - Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant
Exhibit V - Inspection Photos
Exhibit W - Inspection Report
Exhibit X - Notice to Abate and Notice of Violation and Proposed Administrative Civil Penalty
Exhibit Y - Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance
Exhibit Z - Letter of lntent to Serve Inspection Warrant
Exhibit AA - Inspection Photos
Exhibit BB - Dept. Letter
Exhibit CC - Request for Consent Inspection
Exhibit DD - Writ of Mandate
Exhibit EE - Filed Writ of Mandate
Exhibit FF - Inspection Warrant
Exhibit GG - Letter of Intent to Serve Inspection Warrant
Exhibit HH - Inspection Photos
Exhibit II - Letter of Intent to Abate Public Nuisance
Exhibit JJ - Proposed Temporary Restraining Order
Exhibit KK - Email Documentation of Items to Remain
Exhibit LL - Task Order
Exhibit MM - Abatement Photos
Exhibit NN - Service of Notice of Nuisance Abatement Assessment
PREVIOUS ACTION/REFERRAL:
Meeting of: N/A
File No.: N/A