SR 07-25-2017 7C
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meetin g : July 25, 2017
Agenda Item: 7.C
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Joseph Lawrence, Interim City Attorney , City Attorney's Office, Code
Enforcement
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance to Amend Administrative Citation
Hearing Procedures
Recommended Action
Staff recommend s that the City Council (“Council”) introduce for first reading the
attached ordinance amending Sections 1.09.090, 6.16.030, 8.08.040 and 10.04.04.040
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code ("SMMC") to provide greater flexibility, clarity, and
consistency rega rding the procedures for administrative citation appeal hearings .
Executive Summary
The Council has adopted various ordinances that set forth procedural requirements
governing administrative hearings presided by a City of Santa Monica (“City”) Hearin g
Officer. Those hearings generally cover appeals of City -issued a dministrative c itations
and appeals of City decisions/orders relating to licensing and permitting. During the
course of managing and undertaking a dministrative h earings over the past seve ral
years, s taff has gained valuable experience about the process. Staff now brings this
proposed Ordinance to make minor procedural enhancements to h earings, provide
clarification and align local law with longstanding practices.
Background
The Santa Mo nica Municipal Code sets forth the procedures for appeals of
administrative citations or decisions. Generally , Chapter 1.09 governs appeals of
a dministrative c itations, and Chapter 6.16 governs appeals of orders that consist of
denial, suspension, or revo cation of permits or licenses. The proposed changes to
Chapters 1.09 and 6.16 of the SMMC would recognize and codify existing practices,
provide consistency to the existing framework of administrative citation appeals
procedures, and give flexibility to C ity staff responsible for scheduling the hearings. The
2 of 5
proposed changes would also add necessary or clarifying language, and delete
extraneous and /or confusing language from relevant sections of the SMMC.
The proposed change to Section 8.08.040 would co dify the current practice of limiting
appeals of building and work permits or orders to persons who are directly involved in
the permitting process , including the permit applicant, owner of the property, and/or
recipient of the order. The change would min imize confusion by the public, and provide
guidance to City staff when processing appeal requests by parties who are not
authorized to file or when eligible parties file competing requests.
The proposed change to Section 10.04.04.040(e) is intended to corr ect the reference to
an ill -fitting chapter for appeals in the Aircraft Noise Abatement Code, bring the Aircraft
Noise Abatement Code appeals process in conformity with other City department's
enforcement practices, and provide consistency within the admin istrative citation
appeals framework of the SMMC.
Discussion
Amendments to Section 1.09.090 of SMMC
Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 1.09 authorizes the issuance of administrative
citations; Section 1.09.090 of the SMMC specifically addresses the hea ring procedures
for the appeal of an administrative citation brought by the recipient of the citation. The
proposed changes would provide City staff with greater flexibility when scheduling the
hearings to meet deadlines; recognize Hearing Officers’ inher ent power to maintain
order during hearings; and recognize the City Attorney’s Office’s discretion to resolve
dispute s even after the hearing s ha ve been conducted. The proposed changes include
the following:
Amend Section 1.09.090(b) of the SMMC to extend the deadline for
scheduling an appeals hearing from thirty to sixty days from the date the
hearing request is filed with the City. The City Attorney's Office staff
coordinat es the hearings and experience has shown that thirty days can
sometimes be inadequ ate, as staff needs to schedule a time that works for
3 of 5
the party seeking the hearing, the City's enforcement officer who issued the
citation, as well as the Hearing Officer. Scheduling conflicts and requests for
changes are not uncommon, and can delay the p rocess and inadvertently
cause time limits established by the SMMC to be exceeded . Accordingly, the
proposed amendment would provide staff with greater flexibility to schedule a
hearing in time to meet the deadline. Additionally, changing the period to
s ixty days would align this deadline with SMMC Section 6.16.030(d), which
requires a hearing contesting the denial/suspension/revocation of a City
permit or license to be not later than sixty days following receipt of the request
by the City Clerk.
The word s "City Official or the City Attorney" would be replaced by "Hearing
Officer" as the decision -maker of whether there is good cause to extend the
scheduling of the hearing beyond the sixty -day time limit. This proposed
change would provide consistency with SMMC Section 1.09.090(g), which
states the Hearing Officer may continue the hearing upon a showing of good
cause.
New subsection "h" would insert the language "The Hearing Officer shall have
the power to issue orders to keep order and decorum during an
Adm inistrative Hearing. No person shall fail to comply with any such order."
This language codifies what is already well recognized to be one aspect of
the inherent powers of the Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer is charged
with "conducting the review" under SMMC Section 1.09.080.
And finally, new subsection (i) would insert the word "after" to clarify that the
City Attorney's O ffice has discretion to reach a plea agreement, settle, or
dismiss the citation after the hearing has been conducted. The amen dment
would codify the tradition and well -recognized prosecutorial discretion of the
City Attorney's Office to reach a settlement of the dispute before, during, or
after the hearing has been conducted.
Amendments to Section 6.16.030 of SMMC
4 of 5
Chapter 6.16 of the SMMC governs appeals of persons contesting "the action of any
officer or employee of the City suspending, revoking, or denying any permit or license."
The proposed amendments to this Chapter are intended to clarify and recognize
existing practices a nd provide consistency with other provisions of the SMMC.
Amend Section 6.16.030(b) to insert the word "grant" to clarify the Hearing
Officer's existing powers. This section, as amended, would also insert the
following language: "The Appellant has the b urden of proving, based on the
preponderance of the evidence , that the City's action is not in compliance with
applicable laws." The insertion would recognize the basic rule of law that the
party seeking an appeal of a decision carries the burden of proof . This
amendment would also maintain consistency with the burden of proof
requirement for civil actions.
And finally, the proposed insertion of the language at Section 6.16.030(d)
empowering the Hearing Exami ner to maintain order during a hearing, is
alrea dy addressed above.
Amendment to Section 8.08.040 of SMMC
Chapter 8.08 of the SMMC provides for an appeals process for parties seeking to
challenge any decisions, orders, or determinations issued by the Building Officer or the
Fire Marshal, including stop work, suspension or revocation orders.
Consistent with longstanding City practice, such appeals can only be sought by the
permit applicant, the property owner of any permit at issue, or the recipient of any order
from the Building Officer or the Fire Mar shal. The proposed amendment makes this
practice explicit. Furthermore, the proposed amendment would also clarify that when
there are multiple parties with the right to appeal, the property owner's decision to
appeal shall control. Codification and clarif ication of this longstanding practice would
serve to minimize confusion by the public, and be helpful to City staff .
Amendment to Section 10.04.040 of SMMC
5 of 5
The Aircraft Noise Abatement Code (Section 10.04.04) of the SMMC provides for an
appeal process of a n order by the Airport Director. The Aircraft Noise Abatement Code
empowers the Airport Director to impose civil and administrative remedies for violations
of the Aircraft Noise Abatement Code, including monetary fines and suspension or
revocation of Airp ort privileges or permits.
Currently Section 10.04.04.040(e) of the SMMC provides, in part, that persons
“aggrieved by an order of the Airport Direct or may appeal to the City's Hearing
E xaminer pursuant to the time limits and procedures of Chapter 6.16 of this Code."
However, this reference to Chapter 6.16 is inconsistent with the other parts of the
SMMC because most of the orders issued by the Airport Director under the Aircraft
Noise Abatement Code consist of monetary fines and Chapter 6.16 sets forth processes
for appealing the denial or revocation of permits, not monetary fines. The procedures
set forth in Chapter 1.09 of the SMMC are more appropriate for appealing monetary
fines. As to the appeals of order s of the Airport Director that include susp ending or
revoking Airport privileges or permits, the appeal procedure would reference Chapter
6.16.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepa red By: Eda Suh, Deputy City Attorney
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. First Reading Ordinance