►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting May 26, 2020
6b. Municipal Code Title 5 (Nuisances)
B
C
C
B
E
Correct
mr.
mayor
and
members
of
the
City
Council,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
attention
tonight.
I
know
we
have
another
item
on
the
agenda
and
I'll
try
to
move
through
the
presentation
just
as
quickly
as
possible
and
highlight
a
couple
of
points
of
direction
that
we
took
from
the
City
Council
at
the
last
meeting
and
incorporated
them
into
the
ordinance
that
you
have
before
you
for
considering
introduction
tonight.
E
So
our
agenda
tonight
is
just
a
bit
of
background
we're
going
to
discuss
the
a
couple
of
policy
issues
that
came
up
last
time
and
then
briefly
talk
about
next
steps.
So
you'll,
remember
this
background.
You've
seen
it
on
a
number
of
slides
when
we've
brought
back
ordinance
amendments
to
the
various
titles
we're
on
title
five.
E
So
that's
a
great
opportunity
for
the
council
to
to
way
in,
as
we
go
through
the
process,
so
we've
had
a
process,
that's
lasted
just
just
a
little
over
a
year,
starting
last
October
of
2018,
and
we
brought
it
forward
with
titles,
one
and
two
that
were
adopted
in
and
then
title
three
and
2019
in
July
and
then
title
four
in
March
of
this
year
and
then
on
the
28th
of
April.
Just
about
a
month
ago,
you
provided
some
policy
direction
in
regarding
title
five,
which
is
what
we're
on
tonight
so
you'll.
E
And
so
we're
proposing
amendments
to
four
of
those
chapters
and
unfortunately
my
screen
just
changed
and
the
PowerPoint
is
no
longer
displayed
OOP
there.
It
goes
again
all
right,
I
think
we're
all
set.
So
we
have
some
proposed
amendments
to
the
four
chapters
and
I
see
that
my
clicker
is
now
no
longer
working,
so
I
can't
scroll
through
the
slides,
so
I'm.
Sorry
about
that.
We're
going
to
take
just
a
moment
to
see.
If
we
can,
we
can
wait
for
just
a
minute
to
get
that
technical
difficulty
fixed.
C
E
E
E
C
E
So
we're
going
to
talk
about
that
in
just
a
minute.
There's
a
few
other
wording,
changes
for
internal
consistency
and
then
finally,
we've
adopted
the
staff
and
City
Council
suggestion
to
prohibit
the
feeding
of
wild
animals,
if
doing
so
is
causing
a
public
nuisance,
and
if
you
could
go
to
slide
number
seven.
That
would
be
great.
Thank
you.
C
E
Bet
so
we
have
some
proposed
minor
amendments
to
three
of
the
sections
that
are
displayed
on
the
screen,
5.08
5.16
and
5.22,
which
is
the
next
one
after
five
point.
Sixteen
there
you
go,
and
there
were
no
comments.
I,
don't
believe
about
those
at
the
last
meeting,
all
right
if
you
could
go
to
slide
eight.
That
would
be
great,
and
there
are
three
main
bullet
points
here
that
basically
title
five
has
proven
to
be
comprehensive
and
sufficient,
and
what
we
went
over
last
time
was
the
difficult
code.
E
Enforcement
cases
are
usually
not
caused
by
inadequate
ordinances.
There
is
a
few
common
issues
underlying
code
enforcement
and
there's
four
sub
bullets
under
that
Melissa,
along
with
four
sub
bullets
under
the
last
bullet.
So
if
you
could
just
click
that
clicker
eight
times,
I
think
you'll
be
right
there.
So
we
talked
about
this
last
time.
E
I
won't
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
it,
but
it's
the
question
of
whether
there
was
a
public
versus
a
private
nuisance,
whether
the
violations
are
transitory
or
difficult
to
confirm
and
oftentimes
residents
who
have
been
engaging
in
in
whatever
the
behavior
is
that
violates
the
code.
Don't
want
to
change,
and
often
that's
the
case,
regardless
of
whether
there's
a
fine
or
a
sanction
imposed
they'll
just
ignore
it,
they
won't
pay
it
they'll
appeal,
it
they'll
drag
it
out,
and
this
has
been
the
city's
experience
in
some
of
the
more
difficult
code
enforcement
cases.
E
Sometimes
their
neighbor
disputes
sometimes
circumstances
outside
of
their
control.
Sometimes
there
is
a
good
reason
in
their
mind
why
they
would
like
to
keep
the
the
nuisance
condition
on
their
property,
so
Melissa.
If
you
could
go
to
slide
number
nine.
That
would
be
great.
There's,
there's
two
main
bullet
points
and
there's
two
under
the
second
point.
So
the
last
time
we
requested
staff
input
regarding
any
unaddressed
public
nuisance
and
one
of
the
things
that
came
up
was
parking
of
inoperable
vehicles
on
private
property.
E
So
if
you
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
Melissa,
that
would
be
great
and
there's
a
one
main
bullet
with
a
three
sub-bullets
and
a
couple
of
those
under
under
the
last
one.
So
briefly,
we
talked
about
this
earlier
in
the
meeting.
I
think
the
city
manager
brought
it
up,
as
did
the
police
chief
and
one
more
bullet
after
the
purpose.
Thank
you.
The
the
city
has
in
fact
the
City
Council
adopted
a
number
of
strategies
to
limit
overcrowding
both
on
the
street
and
on
private
property.
E
So
we've
had
the
residential
permit
parking
program
implemented
after
a
quite
a
number
of
months.
If
not
years
of
study,
we've
had
a
periodic
enforcement
for
violations
and
you've
heard
the
police
chief
mentioned
those.
This
evening,
we've
had
adopted
new
zoning
regulations
to
allow
additional
off
street
parking,
which
is
the
city
manager
alluded
to
in
one
of
his
earlier
presentations
and
the
whole
point
of
all,
of
these
coordinated
strategies
is
to
increase
the
amount
of
parking
availability
both
on
public
property
and
on
private
property.
E
Nevertheless,
parking
of
inoperable
vehicles
can
still
be
an
issue,
and
so,
if
you
could
go
to
slide,
11
there's
two
main
bullet
points
here
and
if
you
click
one
more
time
and
then
another
four
times,
you'll
be
all
done
with
this
one.
So
the
City
Council's
Direction
at
the
last
meeting,
was
to
focus
on
inoperable
vehicles
and
what
your
existing
code
in
Chapter
seven
says
that
inoperable
vehicles
may
only
be
parked
in
an
enclosed
building:
that's
not
visible
from
public
or
private
property.
E
Well,
if
you
pause
for
a
minute,
you'll
realize
sort
of
how
broad
and
all-encompassing
that
is
so.
What
that
essentially
means
is
that
if
you
have
an
inoperable
vehicle,
it
has
to
be
parked
in
a
garage.
In
essence,
or
some
enclosed
building
that
isn't
so
that
the
vehicle
itself
is
invisible
from
either
public
property
or
from
private
property.
E
So,
given
the
City
Council's
direction
at
the
last
meeting,
what
we
did
is
went
through
title
five
and
made
a
couple
of
amendments
so
that
title
five
is
now
consistent
with
chapter
seven
point:
three:
six:
well,
what
did
we
do?
In
a
couple
of
places
we
incorporated
references
to
7.36
at
the
suggestion
of
I,
believe
I
think
it
was
council,
member
Medina
but
I
I'm,
sorry
I.
If
I've
got
that
wrong.
E
I
can't
recall
that
the
we've
clarified
that
a
DMV
certificate
of
not
operation
is
not
a
sufficient
for
parking,
an
inoperable
vehicle
if
it's
visible
and
we'll
amend
seven
point
three
six
at
a
later
date.
So
what
this
basically
means
is
that
just
because
you
go
to
the
DMV
and
get
something
that
says
my
car
is
is
not
operational.
That
doesn't
mean
it's
an
operational
vehicle
under
under
city
codes.
It's
still
an
inoperable
vehicle
and
you
still
can't
park
it
accept
it
in
a
closed
building.
E
We
made
some
minor
changes
to
conform
in
a
couple
of
sections
so
that
all
the
vehicle
types
are
matched
up
and
then
finally,
one
the
suggestions
was
to
sort
of
unclear
how
long
camper
shells
could
be
on
property,
and
it
currently
says
reasonable
time
and
I
agree.
That
was
unclear.
So
we've
changed
that
to
72
hours
to
be
consistent
with
the
normal
72
hour
rule
of
parking
on
public
property.
So
those
are
in
essence
the
changes
that
we
proposed
to
address
the
City
Council's
direction
and
for
consistency
to
chapter
seven
point
three:
six.
E
So
if
you
could
go
to
slide
number
12-
and
we
have
two
main
bullet
points
here
with
two
sub
bullets
under
the
second
one.
So
these
amendments,
we
think,
do
make
it
consistent
with
7.36,
but
just
because
you
amend
the
code
and
make
it
consistent
doesn't
mean
it's
going
to
solve
the
problem,
and
so
there
will
be
additional
discussion
with
the
City
Council
at
a
number
of
future
meetings
having
to
do
with
future
efficiencies
proposed
for
implementation
of
an
inoperable
vehicle
abatement
program
and
just
to
let
everybody
know
in
case
it.
E
It
wasn't
clear
to
begin
with.
This
is
a
difficult,
intractable
problem
and
often
requires
a
substantial
amount
of
effort
and
resources
by
cities
up
and
down
the
peninsula
and,
frankly,
all
over
the
state
to
abate
non-operable
vehicles,
and
that
is
especially
the
case
when
they're
being
abated
from
private
property,
where
their
due
process
rights
are
more
robust
than
they
are
with
respect
to
removal
on
public
property.
If
you
could
go
to
slide
13,
that
would
be
fantastic
and
we
have
one
main
bullet
point
for
parking
with
just
two
sub
bullets.
E
So
we
are
not
changing
and
there's
just
three
under
tarps
we'll
get
to
that
in
a
minute
at
the
city
council's
direction.
We
are
not
changing
the
number
of
allowed
operable
parked
boats,
trailers,
campers
or
RV.
Our
code
says
1
and
the
consensus
I
think
was
to
leave
it
at
1.
So
if
they're
operable,
you
can
park
one
of
those
on
the
property
and
then
finally
relating
to
parking.
There
was
a
discussion
about
tarps
and
I
confess
that
I
didn't
get
a
clear
direction.
I,
don't
think
from
really
even
a
majority
of
the
city
Cal.
E
E
You
could
flip
quickly
to
slide
14
and
we're
almost
done
the
other
unaddressed
public
nuisance
conditions,
there's
one
more
after
this
would
be
to
prohibit
feeding
wild
animals
if
causing
a
public
nuisance.
The
reason
why
we
worded
it
this
way
is
to
avoid
the
problem
of
which
animals
or
some
animals
and
not
other
animals
or
other
sorts
of
complexities
that
actually
would
make
it
difficult
to
enforce.
If
there's
a
public
nuisance,
we
know
what
that's
defined
as
then.
There's
a
complaint
staff
can
enforce
and
then
there's
minor
wording
amendments
throughout
the
code.
E
So
the
final
slide
is
number
15
with
just
four
bullets,
and
that
is
to
introduce
the
ordinance
tonight
after
you've
reviewed
the
amendments.
We
can
schedule
adoption
for
the
very
next
meeting
and
we
still
remain
on
track,
hopefully
to
complete
all
of
the
chapters
by
hopefully
by
the
end
of
next
year,
if
not
sooner.
That
concludes
my
report
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
B
F
Trying
to
raise
my
hand
so
yeah,
so
mark,
you're,
correct
I,
think
we
I
don't
think
we
were
really
clear
and
tarps
or
no
tarps,
so
I
think
there
is
really
no
right
answer.
I
will
say
that
you
know
I,
think
your
words
are
excellent
and
that
you,
you
know
it's
not
the
code.
Of
course
it's
not
the
wording
that
we
need
to
change,
that
there
really
is
good.
It
really
is
a
good
ordinance.
F
D
D
D
So
for
anybody
who's
watching
this
recording
it's
on
page
142
2:143
at
that
of
the
packet.
The
issue
here
that
I
wanted
to
just
raise
is
that
it
really
places
the
city
in
an
awkward
position,
because
the
state
law
does
allow
I
believe
it's
six
cannabis,
Clinton
plants
and
the
city,
then,
is
it's
just
kind
of
step.
D
In
and
enforce
a
contract
between
the
landlord
and
the
tenant,
so
my
recommendation
and
my
suggestion
would
be
to
add
somewhere
in
here
some
language
that
says
you
know
that
it
does
not
adhere
to
the
state
law,
because
otherwise
the
city
is
gonna,
be
have
to
use
its
own
resources
and
and
we're
already
at
capacity
to
try
to
really
enforce
a
lease.
That's
between
a
landlord
and
a
tenant
and
maybe
adhering
to
the
state
laws.
So
I,
don't
know.
I,
know,
mark
and
I
spoke
about
this
earlier
in
mark
I.
D
E
If
I
may
be
a
mayor,
yes,
please
Thank
You,
councilmember,
Mason
I.
Thank
you
for
for
noting
that
and
noting
it
in
in
the
version
of
the
ordinance
and
I
do
think
it's
a
good
suggestion.
We
can
easily
insert
something
here
that
says
you
know
in
violation
of
state
law
whatever
it
may
be.
That's
not
what
it'll
say,
but
we'll
add
some
words
in
there
that
make
it
clear
that
the
the
staff
is
is
not
to
be
enforcing
when
the
tenant
is
cultivating
in
a
way
that
is
consistent
with
state
law
and.
D
E
A
A
second
okay,
so
my
question
is
about
the
in
ops
and
tarps
right,
so
let's
say
you
have
an
inn
up
on
you're
on
a
property
it
gets
reported.
The
property
owner
throws
the
tarp
on
top
of
it,
and
then
what
happens?
Let's
say
that
tarp
is
on
that
car
for
a
long
time
and
with
the
Sun,
it
starts
getting
tattered
and
it's
blowing
around
like
something
out
of
The
Walking
Dead
and
it
just
really
unsightly
so
I
think
if
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
do
this
one
time
I
think
we
should.
E
A
Right
so
so
now
you,
if
it's
an
in
up,
you
can
see
the
registration
along
as
you're
on
the
path
of
getting
to
the
home.
Like
a
postal
carrier,
you
could
you
could
look
up
and
see
that
it's
not
registered
right.
So
what
would
stop
somebody
from
throwing
a
tarp
on
that
vehicle
and
then
say
you
know,
leave
me
alone.
It's
tarp,
I!
Don't
want
you
to
bother
me.
I
have
a
right
to
my
privacy,
so.
E
E
So
you
that
the
goal
is
not
accomplished
necessarily
by
having
an
ordinance
saying,
there's
no
tarps
on
vehicles,
because
you
could
put
an
star
upon
a
vehicle
and
a
nice
car
cover
and
it
looks
good.
It
may
look
good
for
a
long
time.
So
then,
what
do
you
do
you
say?
Well,
you
you
can
have
a
tarp
or
a
cover,
but
only
when
it's
not
dilapidated,
so
in
that
word,
dilapidated
is
used
in
in
the
nuisance
ordinance.
E
So
there
is
some
precedent
for
that,
but
it's
much
more
difficult
to
enforce
and
to
determine
what
what
exactly?
That
means.
A
good
example
of
that.
Actually,
that
came
up
in
a
property
situation
was
an
awning
that
that
was
present
in
a
what
staff
believed
was
a
dilapidated
condition
in
a
visible
location
on
El
Camino
Real.
So
it
wasn't
a
car,
but
it
was
an
awning
and
it
took
months
if
not
a
year,
along
with
conversations
with
the
property
owners
attorney
to
have
them
make
that
awning
not
look
dilapidated
anymore.
E
A
And
that
is
fine.
Thank
you
for
that
explanation.
I
just
recall
that
some
of
the
tricks
of
when
I
worked
here
as
a
code
enforcement
officer
that
people
could
use
to
circumvent
the
intent
so
I
I,
look
forward
to
that.
You
know
the
future
program
to
deal
with
it,
because
the
more
in
ops
that
are
off
this
out
of
driveways
the
more
parking
spaces
that
are
available
to
that
property
owner
and
to
the
community
from
having
those
vehicles
removed.
So
thank
you.
If.
G
G
We
we
do
have
code
enforcement
moving
to
the
police
department
and
I
have
tasked
the
police
department
with
doing
a
thorough
look
with
the
tools
that
are
available
to
enhance
or
enforcement,
and
that
may
require
subsequent
changes
to
title
5
or
title
7,
but
specific
to
a
campaign
for
inoperable
vehicles
or
abandoned
vehicles
that
it
that
is
not
currently
on
on
staffs
work
plan,
but
in
a
general
direction
to
increase
the
effectiveness
of
our
code
enforcement
is.
Thank
you
thank.
E
B
H
Thank
you
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
a
lot
of
what
we're
discussing
really
starts
getting
dangerously
close
to
just
being
an
infringement
on
people's
right
to
do
basically
to
do
what
they
want
to
do
with
their
property.
And
you
know
you
can
start
with
tarps
and
saying
you
know
your
tarp
is
too
ugly
and
then
all
of
a
sudden,
you're
saying
I,
don't
like
the
color
of
your
house
and
the
flag
that
you're
flying
in
from
your
house
is
too
tattered.
It's
too
faded,
I,
don't
like
it.
So
you
have
to
change
it.
H
So
I
mean
I,
don't
know
where
it
stopped
from
there
and
and
really
like.
Like
the
city
attorney
said
you
know
it's,
it
comes
back
to
what
problem
we'll
be
trying
to
solve
and
if
getting
rid
of
tarps
we
think
is
gonna
create
more
parking
spots.
I
I
would
debate
that
and
say:
I,
don't
see
that
happening.
H
H
I
know
a
lot
of
this
is
still
going
to
be
complaint
driven,
and
so
hopefully
we
you
focus
on
areas
that
are
indeed
of
light,
so
not
talking
about
the
one
abandoned
car
or
the
one
inoperable
car,
but
you
know
hopefully
places
where
we've
seen
two
three
up
to
ten
cars
on
a
lot
abandoned
and
dilapidated
and
those
those
are
the
areas
that
we
do
want
to
clean
up.
And
so
this
this
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction.
E
Thank
You
councilmember
Salazar
for
that
suggestion,
so
I
picked
that
up
in
my
review,
because
motorcycles
is
listed
in
in
another
section
and
we
thought
okay
well,
they
should
all
be
consistent.
I
think
the
the
intent
of
this
is
to
say
that
if
you're
right,
you
can
have
one
boat,
you
know
one
trailer
camper,
whatever
RV
or
motorcycle,
and
certainly
you
could
take
motorcycles
out
of
this
and
not
affect
the
rest
of
the
code.
I
only
added
it
in
for
consistency,
but
it's
up
to
the
City
Council.
If
they'd
like
to
remove
it.
H
B
A
B
We
concur
on
the
motorcycle
as
well
out
of
this
as
far
we've
had
in
regards
to
motorcycle
and
then
also
adding
or
inserting
language
force
between
Landlord
and
Tenant
on
the
Canopus
that
Linda
had
discussed.
So
that's
what's
before
us.
This
is
item
B,
which
is
there
is
a
city
turn
and
correct
me,
but
we
need
to
waive
the
first
reading.
That's.