HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02131990 - 1.26 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �E
Contra
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator - Costa
DATE:
February 5 , 1990 '�"�' �'�'
County��
SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: AB 1053 (Lempert)
I
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECONIlEENDATION
Adopt a position in SUPPORT of AB 1053 by Assemblyman Lempert
which would authorize increased civil penalties when a property
owner has been warned by the District Attorney or city attorney
that the property owner' s property is being used for specified
controlled substance violations and fails to prevent or abate the
situation.
BACKGROUND
Existing law authorizes the imposition of a civil penalty of up
to $25,000 against any or all defendants in an action which
establishes that a building or place constitutes a nuisance
because of a specified controlled substance violation.
AB 1053 , as amended January 12, 1990, would create a separate
maximum civil penalty of up to $500,000 which a court may assess
if the court finds that, subsequent to written notification from
the District Attorney or city attorney that the building or place
is a nuisance because it is being used for the purpose of
unlawfully selling, serving, storing, keeping, manufacturing or
giving away any controlled substance, precursor or analog in
violation of existing law, the defendant or defendants failed to
take action to prevent or abate the nuisance.
AB 1053 would exempt public housing corporation from these
provisions. The bill would also require the court to consider in
assessing a civil penalty in excess of $25,000 the severity and
Yes
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
�L APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): �i/! /�-�-C '00e
ACTION OF BOARD ON February 13 , 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
I,
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: Please see Page 2 . ATTESTED FEB 1 .3 1990
PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
M382 (10/88)
BY DEPUTY
i
duration of the nuisance and whether the defendant or defendants
derived any economic benefits other than the fair market rental
value from the existence of the nuisance. The bill would also
allow the courtlto assess the civil penalty only if the District
Attorney or city attorney has previously made application for a
temporary writ of injunction or if the District Attorney or city
attorney has determined that based on the available evidence the
application is not warranted.
AB 1053 provides that the maximum civil penalty of up to $500 ,000
would be divided as follows: 45% to the law enforcement or
prosecutorial agency or agencies which investigated the case, 45%
to the District ;Attorney' s office or city attorney' s office which
filed the action, to be used solely for controlled substance law
enforcement and 10% to programs that are part of the county drug
program plan for drug prevention and education. These funds
would all have to be used to supplement any local, state or
federal funds which would otherwise be made available to these
agencies.
AB 1053 appears; to be consistent with the Board of Supervisors'
war on drugs in that it increases the penalties on a property
owner who allows his or her property to be used to manufacture or
distribute illegal drugs. As a result, it appears that it would
be appropriate for the Board to indicate its support for AB 1053 .
cc: County Administrator
District Attorney
Sheriff-Coroner
Public Defender
County Probation Officer
Health Services Director
Superior Court ,Administrator
Municipal Court Administrator
Drug Program Administrator
Chairman, Drug Abuse Advisory Committee
Les Spahnn, SRJI Jackson, Barish & Associates
i