Public nuisances - void city citations

[admin]

Public Nuisances

Note these issues have not been adjudicated and determined by a Court of Appeal or federal court.

Limited civil Appellate Divisions decision really mean nothing unless a Court of Appeal agrees. Limited civil is a black hole. Your appeal to Limited Civil Appellate Division who's superior court judges are just the bowling team and super bowl party friends of the judicial officer you are appealing. Its hard to rationalize why and how you would receive fair review of their best friend and Sunday golf partner.

Court of Appeal is a different entity altogether and not associated with Superior Court - and that is the difference. Its a big difference.

The conundrum is that when you lose in the Appellate Division, that is the end - unless a miracle happened and gods hand touches your shoulder and the Court of Appeal takes up your case. Or the Supreme Court of California... an even rarer miracle.

Cities violate the law until some higher power says they cannot violate the law. That is the problem.

Some cities, rather than following the letter of the law, and enacting ordinances against each specific issue, are citing everything under the sun as a public nuisance, charging a fine, and putting the money into their city manager's raises and vacations, seminars in Florida, Mexico and Newport Beach, and new cars for all city employees (that they take home).

Public nuisances do not lend themselves to fines and must be abated. A City must ABATE a public nuisance, not fine you for it. We will have a whole section on this. Basically some cites are sticking you with citation after citation after citation for things they are mandated to abate by law. The goal of a public nuisance violation is to eliminate the nuisance NOT fine the citizen.

Defining what a public nuisance is. A public nuisance is a big big deal.
A public nuisance is a misdemeanor by law.
People ex rel. Gallo v. Acuna 14 Cal. 4th 1090, 929 P.2d 596, 60 Cal. Rptr. 2d 277 (1997).

City has three choices to remedy a public nuisance. A citation is not one of them.
Flahive v. City of Dana Point, 85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 51, 72 Cal. App. 4th 241, 72 C.A.4th 241 (Ct. App. 1999).

Public nuisances are to be abated.
People ex rel. Hicks v. Sarong Gals, 42 Cal. App. 3d 556, 117 Cal. Rptr. 24 (Ct. App. 1974).
People ex rel. Sorenson v. Randolph, 99 Cal. App. 3d 183 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 1st Div. 1979

Just because a City says it is a nuisance, does not mean it is.
Leppo v. City of Petaluma, 20 Cal. App. 3d 711, 97 Cal. Rptr. 840 (Ct. App. 1971).

Historically nuisances per se are huge issues that a city may "declare" huge issues a nuisance - such as "smoke stacks" "nuclear plants" "pig farms" basically things that affect the whole neighborhood or whole city. See Gallo v. Acuna.

Watch out! - if a code officer is charging you with "public nuisances" without abatement then argue your ass off.

The city us usurping State law using a sly dubious procedure and not getting rid of the purported "public nuisance." This has become a major problem - cities fining people for "alleged" nuisances that are never abated. State law does not permit "fines" of public nuisances. The whole point of a nuisance is to get rid of it - not to fine the owner.

* In our specific situation the code officer cited us under a "public nuisance" Notice and Abatement ordinance, and then pivoted and issued an administrative citation (fine) doing nothing to abate the "alleged nuisance." Basically he (code officer) cited one way (abatement ordinance) and then acted a different way (citation and fine), never abating or attempting to abate what he "declared" a public nuisance. Effectively a sham - somewhat similar to a "administrative speed trap." This procedure is a CASH COW for the city. Forcing defendants to put up money, which they do not have to do under abatement, and pay a fine in advance just to defend the citation. SHAM.