Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 Code Enforcement Admin Civil PenaltiesAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: Meeting Type: Staff Contact/Dept.: Staff Phone No: Estimated Time: Council Goals: 6/12/2023 Work Session Charlie Kent/DPW 541-726-3755 50 Minutes Provide Financially Responsible and Innovative Government Services ITEM TITLE: CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTIES ACTION Review the proposed Administrative Civil Penalties process and provide guidance REQUESTED: on implementation. ISSUE Code Enforcement staff have identified that a tiered enforcement response is an essential STATEMENT: step in improving the effectiveness of the Code Enforcement Program. Presently, enforcement exclusively follows a judicial path ending at the Municipal court. This labor- intensive legal mechanism is an essential tool in tiered enforcement, but not as the sole recourse for non-compliance. The Administrative Civil Penalties (ACP) process provides code enforcement staff with a less formal tool to resolve violations in a more efficient and community -oriented approach. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Briefing Memorandum 2. Power -point presentation 3. Flow Chart 4. Code example — Corvallis 5. Code Example -- Eugene DISCUSSION/ Code Enforcement staff currently use a one size fits all judicial enforcement FINANCIAL mechanism. This is a very involved and lengthy process which at a minimum takes IMPACT: five weeks, but more commonly may last months and sometimes years. The Administrative Civil Penalties process is more efficient and direct than a civil procedure, though it still must comply with the rights of due process. While the ultimate goal of code enforcement remains voluntary compliance, the ACP process provides a more appropriate and tiered response to those common violations which usually have the lowest barriers to compliance. The ACP process is best suited for non -serious, non -emergency violations. Essentially, an administrative civil penalty would be imposed on the City's finding that a violation has occurred and reasonable attempts by City staff to gain voluntary compliance have been refused or ignored. A matrix would be created to target specific code sections commonly violated which also have the lowest barriers to compliance. The intent is the ACP process be used as a substitute for Municipal court proceedings in those occurrences which do not require a Judicial finding. Code Enforcement staff recommend instituting an administrative civil penalties process as a tiered enforcement tool and seek Council review and input to help guide code and policy development. MEMORANDUM City of Springfield Date: June 12, 2023 To: Nancy Newton, City Manager COUNCIL From: Charlie Kent, Code Enforcement Officer (AIC) BRIEFING Jeff Paschall, Community Development Director Subject: Code Enforcement Administrative Civil Penalties MEMORANDUM ISSUE: Code Enforcement staff have identified that a tiered enforcement response is an essential step in improving the effectiveness of the Code Enforcement Program. Presently, enforcement exclusively follows a judicial path ending at the Municipal court. This labor-intensive legal mechanism is an essential tool in tiered enforcement, but not as the sole recourse for non- compliance. The Administrative Civil Penalties (ACP) process provides code enforcement staff with a less formal tool to resolve violations in a more efficient and community -oriented approach. COUNCIL GOALS/MANDATE: Provide Financially Responsible and Innovative Government Services DISCUSSION: "As an alternative or supplement to judicial action, enforcement agencies may use a variety of administrative remedies to gain compliance with state and municipal regulations. Administrative remedies which do not use the criminal or civil courts may be employed early in the enforcement cycle when the responsible person refuses to comply after receiving notices of violation. Although not required by law, many agencies establish a practice of using administrative alternatives before filing a case in court. "-Schilling, Hare An Administrative Civil Penalty process (ACP) is commonly used within code compliance programs across the state and nation as an effective enforcement tool. The ACP process provides a clear and equitable environment for potential forfeiture compared to judicial alternatives. The process is simpler and more efficient. Staff time is utilized more effectively as a community partner through onsite interactions where educational outreach is prioritized, and the total time to case resolution can be dramatically reduced. Effectively, an ACP prevents long-term or chronic issues by addressing violations in a timely manner when they are relatively minor. A tiered enforcement process will provide for a more individualized and appropriate approach to compliance by removing more challenging legal barriers which should primarily be used for significant, chronic, or complex violations. To clarify the difference between our current civil /judicial enforcement model and an ACP model, it's important to understand the current civil/judicial process and the life cycle of a complaint/violation. The following outline provides a summary of routine workflow steps. Current civil citation/judicial workflow process: 1. A neighbor, resident, community member, or partner agency contacts the City to report a code violation. 2. The City's code enforcement administrative staff records the violation, determines jurisdiction, clarifies any required information, and assigns a response priority. Attachment 1 Page 1 of 4 3. Violations are assigned based on priority and a first inspection is scheduled for the next business day. 4. Officers investigate, record results on a tablet, and determine a responsible person. 5. If a violation is found, a notice ordering the responsible person to correct the violation is usually mailed within 48 hours. 6. Reinspection occurs after 10-30 days (less for minor nuisance violations and more for complex or significant cases) as determined by officers. Deadlines may be extended by officer discretion. 7. Additional reinspection's may potentially be scheduled as necessary following a warning citation or final warning citation mailed within 48 hours after inspection. 8. If the violation remains after the final warning, a citation and complaint will be filed with the Municipal Court. 9. The responsible person is arraigned 2-3 weeks following issuance of the citation. 10. Regular reinspection's occur on the day of arraignment to trigger the citation cycle. Further citations may be issued if violations remain. 11. Trial is set 3-4 weeks following the arraignment. 12. Additional methods to address non-compliance that are rarely used are administrative abatement and administrative inspection warrants. Just over half of complaints and violations are resolved within 30 days of initial contact which is after the first deadline has passed and a warning citation is issued or an extension is granted by the enforcing officer. If it is necessary to file a citation and complaint with the Municipal court, the process timeframe lengthens by a minimum of 5 weeks due to legal procedure and placement on the Court's docket. More commonly the initial trial occurs 7-8 weeks after the date of the citation. Occasionally, a property/ may receive multiple citations during the process which can delay the trial date in order to resolve all violations through one trial. It is not uncommon for these multi -citation trials to start 4 months after the date of the initial citation, potentially 5 to 6 months after initial contact. The typical judicial timeframe is appropriate for complex violations or for required corrections which involve significant effort, financial considerations, and parallel legal processes like eviction. Additionally, some violators are more receptive to the judicial process because of the formal setting, ability to call witnesses, and to be heard by a neutral arbiter. The Municipal Court finding does have an appeal process to the Circuit Court and provides an additional measure of insulation for City staff. There are two differences between a judicial and an ACP process, presumption and procedure. In the current judicial process, the City presents facts and testimony to the Municipal Court Judge who then finds the accused guilty or not guilty based on the judicial interpretation of the code, those facts and testimony presented by the City, and defendant during the legal proceeding. If found guilty, the City recommends an appropriate penalty. In an ACP process, it is presumed that the officer's findings are factual, and penalties are unilaterally imposed through a standard violation -specific matrix. Because due process is required for the lawful application of both processes, an appeal process is available in both. A guilty party would appeal the Municipal Courts finding to the Circuit Appellate court, where the City Attorney would represent the City, and a guilty party in the ACP process would appeal to a hearings official. Again, there are considerable differences to both paths. Because the legal burden shifts from the Municipal court to the individual code officer in the ACP process, a sworn oath of office or other credible legal mechanism may be required to act with appropriate authority. Attachment 1 Page 2 of 4 The ACP process provides for a more City -specific approach. For instance, the City of Eugene's code enforcement supervisor exclusively administers the ACP process by a more standard, national model, while Corvallis's ACP process is driven by the Building Official. The City of Springfield can tailor an administrative civil penalties process to fit the city's needs and desired outcomes. As an example, a vehicle parked in a prohibited area could have an initial deadline for compliance of three days (or as determined by a standard matrix). A notice would be posted in plain view if a responsible person was not located on site and every reasonable effort would be made to do so during the initial inspection. If the violation remains, a "fix -it" ticket could be issued with a correct - by or pay deadline of 5 additional days. If the violation is corrected before the due date, the record will be closed as "compliant", and no further action will be taken. Additional inspections would be conducted at least every second day and penalties would be assessed for each daily instance observed in violation. Once the penalties assessed reach the minimum fine due in Municipal court, $500, each following non -complaint inspection would be processed as a civil citation in the municipal court. Example ACP workflow process: 1. A neighbor, resident, community member, or partner agency contacts the City to report a code violation. 2. The City's code enforcement administrative staff records the violation, determines jurisdiction, clarifies any required information, and assigns a response priority. 3. Violations are assigned based on priority and a first inspection is scheduled for the next business day. 4. Officers investigate, record results on a tablet, and determine a responsible person. 5. If a violation is found, a notice is left on site requiring corrective action within 3 days. 6. A reinspection occurs on the 4t" day and a 5 -day fix -it ticket is issued if the violation remains. Reinspection's occur every other day until the Municipal court threshold of $500 is met or until the violation is corrected. 8. Once the threshold is met, the case transfers to the civil citation/judicial workflow process where fines significantly increase. The timeframe for violations using the ACP process would be dramatically less than the judicial process. Depending on the ACP fine amount and deadline matrix, direct staff intervention could begin as early as 3-5 days from the date of first inspection and shift to judicial intervention as early as 14-21 days. This timeframe is significantly shorter than our current process and highlights an educational, in-person approach. QUESTION FOR COUNCIL: Does Council support the Administrative Civil Penalties (ACP) process as a tiered enforcement response? NEXT STEPS: Based on the input received from the City Council, staff is scheduled to return on September 5, 2023, with a draft of an ACP process and required municipal code updates for review and consideration. Attachment 1 Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Give staff direction on the following questions: 1. Does Council support the Administrative Civil Penalties (ACP) process as a tiered enforcement response? 2. Provide input to guide code and policy development. Attachment 1 Page 4 of 4 REG Code Enforcement Administrative Civil Penalties Attachment 2 Page 1 of 8 Administrative Civil Penalt Prohibited Parking tication Prohibited Parking Attachment 2 Page 2 of 8 I Code Enforcement Effectiveness ACP Process More effective for minor violations Community outreach oriented Faster intervention, 3-5 day deadlines Can progress to judicial process Judicial Process More effective for complex or chronic violations Provides legal framework Insulates staff Prepares for other legal tools Attachment 2 Page 3 of 8 Violations With Low Barrier to Resolution Prohibited parking Garbage Obstruction of the right of way Fences Odors Stagnant water Stored vehicle Attachment 2 Page 4 of 8 Due Process ACP appeal Must occur within 10 days of deadline for payment Hearings official Et code officer Less formal, mediation oriented Provides informal, legal process LCOG contract Judicial appeal Must occur within 30 days after Municipal court finding Circuit Court, attorney represented Formal legal process Legal determination Attachment 2 Page 5 of 8 Ah 1-3 Days 10-30 Days MW Complaint To First First Inspection Inspection Result/NOV 1. Deadline 1 10-30JUL10-30- ays�DaysaiiiiiIiiiiiiiIiiii Reinspection /Warning Citation Deadline Reinspection /Final Warning Deadline Uwe 14-21 ays Civil Citation AM 21-30 11 Trial Jotentia 1-3 Days CEJ 3-5 Days CEJ 3-5 Days Compliant To First Reinspection First Inspection/ /Fix -it Ticket Inspection Notice to deadline comply AG:R:rre 10-14 � 14-21 Reinspection /Additional Civil Citation tickets IMI 21-30 Trial !'r 0%0%0\0A$'%EM0WMR . Council Q A Attachment 2 Page 8 of 8 ACP Process (Track A) Decision Point; Will staff be given discretion to negotiate? If so, it must be based on set criteria Decision Point: Costs; Discretion to delay and/or reduce fine .r Notice of Civil Penalty Imposed: Amount determined by program but must be linked to fee schedule Pay and Correct Is Other Permits. Code provides if person has outstanding forfeiture City can deny other permits at its discretion. Person gives written notice of protest of civil Hearing Appeal - Writ of Review in Circuit Court No Pay? Lien/ Collections .04 Reasonable Attempts: Prior Written Notice* Warning Notice* Municipal Court (Track B) Notice of Civil Penalty; amount set by Code Amount Standard in Code Court Hearing/ Costs Decision Pay or Correct No Pay? Lien/ Collections Appeal Circuit Court (do over) 00 *The purpose of this will be to notify the person that they are in violation of the Code and the basis for that. You must make reasonable attempts to get compliance before issuing a civil penalty or filing for a civil infraction. Attachment 3 Page 1 of 1 Section 9.01.210 - Violations; penalties; remedies. 1) No person shall erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain a building or structure in the City, or cause the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of this code. 2) Violation of a provision of this code is subject to a Civil Penalty no less than $50.00 and not exceeding $5,000.00 per offense, or in the case of a continuing offense, not more than $1,000.00 for each day of the offense and shall be processed in accordance with the procedures set forth in 9.01.210.010 through 9.01.210.020. 3) Each day that a violation of a provision of this code exists constitutes a separate violation. 4) The penalties and remedies provided in this section are not exclusive and are in addition to other penalties and remedies available to the City under the Corvallis Municipal Code, or other City ordinance, or law. ( Ord. 2021-08, § 5(Exh. A), 06/07/2021; Ord. 2010-01 § 1, 02/01/2010; Ord. 2002-23 § 2, 07/15/2002; Ord. 96-17 § 2, 1996) Section 9.01.210.010 Building Official—Authority to impose administrative civil penalty. 1) In addition to, and not in lieu of, any other enforcement mechanism authorized by this code, upon a determination by the building official that a person has violated a provision of this chapter or a rule adopted thereunder, the building official may impose upon the violator and/or any other responsible person an administrative civil penalty as provided by subsections (1) to (12) of this section. For purposes of this subsection, a responsible person includes the violator, and if the violator is not the owner of the building or property at which the violation occurs, may include the owner as well. 2) Prior to imposing an administrative civil penalty under this section, the building official shall pursue reasonable attempts to secure voluntary correction, failing which the building official may issue a notice of civil violation to one or more of the responsible persons to correct the violation. Except where the building official determines that the violation poses an immediate threat to health, safety, environment, or public welfare, the time for correction will be not less than 5 calendar days. 3) Following the date or time by which the correction must be completed as required by an order to correct a violation, the building official will determine whether such correction has been completed. If the required correction has not been completed by the date or time specified in the order, the building official may impose a civil penalty on each person to whom an order to correct was issued. 4) Notwithstanding subsection (2) above, the building official may impose a civil penalty without having issued an order to correct violation or made attempts to secure voluntary correction where the building official determines that the violation was knowing or intentional or a repeat of a similar violation. 5) In imposing a penalty authorized by this section, the building official shall consider: a) The person's past history in taking all feasible steps or procedures necessary or appropriate to correct the violation; b) Any prior violations of statutes, rules, hhorders, and permits; c) The gravity and magnitude of the violation, 4 Page 1 of 3 Whether the violation was repeated or continuous; iic d) e) Whether the cause of the violation was an unavoidable accident, negligence, or an intentional act; f) The violator's cooperativeness and efforts to correct the violation; and g) Any relevant rule of the building code or the City code. 6) The notice of civil penalty must either be served by personal service or must be sent by registered or certified mail and by first class mail. Any such notice served by mail must be deemed received for purposes of any time computations hereunder 3 days after the date mailed if to an address within this state, and 7 days after the date mailed if to an address outside this state. A notice of civil penalty will include: a) Reference to the particular code provision or rule involved; b) A short and plain statement of the matters asserted or charged; c) A statement of the amount of the penalty or penalties imposed; d) The date on which the order to correct was issued and time by which correction was to be made, or if the penalty is imposed pursuant to subsection (4), a short and plain statement of the basis for concluding that the violation was knowing, intentional, or repeated; and e) A statement of the party's right to appeal the civil penalty. 7) Any person who is issued a notice of civil penalty may appeal the penalty to the Building Official. The City Manager will hear the appeal or appoint a Hearings Officer. The provisions of Section 9.01.210.020 of this code shall govern any hearing, whether heard by the City Manager or the appointed Hearings Officer, except that the burden of proof shall be on the building official. 8) A civil penalty imposed hereunder will become final upon expiration of the time for filing an appeal, unless the responsible person appeals the penalty to the City Manager or designee pursuant to, and within the time limits established by, Section 9.01.210.020. If the responsible person appeals the civil penalty to the City Manager or designee, the penalty will become final, if at all; upon issuance of the decision of the Hearings Officer, City Manager or designee affirming the imposition of the administrative civil penalty. 9) Each day the violator fails to remedy the code violation shall constitute a separate violation. 10) Failure to pay a penalty imposed hereunder within 10 days after the penalty becomes final as provided in subsection (8), constitutes a violation of this code. Each day the penalty is not paid constitutes a separate violation. The building official also is authorized to collect the penalty by any administrative or judicial action or proceeding authorized by subsection (11) below, other provisions of this code, or state statutes. The civil administrative penalty authorized by this section is in addition to: a) Assessments or fees for any costs incurred by the City in remediation, cleanup, or abatement; and b) Any other actions authorized by law. 11) If an administrative civil penalty is imposed on a responsible person because of a violation of any provision of this code resulting from prohibited use or activity on real property, and the penalty remains unpaid 30 days after such penalty become final, the building official must assess the property the full amount of the unpaid fine and will enter such an assessment as a lien in the municipal lien docket. At the time such an assessment is made, the building official will notify F@gpbf RMggD AbA that the penalty has been assessed against the real property upon which the violation occurred and has been entered in the municipal lien docket. The lien is enforced in the same manner as liens established by City Council pursuant to Section 9.01.220. The interest will commence from the date of entry of the lien in the lien docket. 12) In addition to enforcement mechanisms authorized elsewhere in this code, failure to pay an administrative civil penalty imposed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section will be grounds for withholding issuance of requested permits or licenses, issuance of a stop work order, if applicable, or revocation or suspension of any issued permits or certificates of occupancy. ( Ord. 2021-08, § 5(Exh. A), 06/07/2021; Ord. 2010-01 § 1, 02/01/2010) Section 9.01.210.020 Appeal procedures. 1) A person aggrieved by an administrative action of the building official taken pursuant to a section of this code authorizing an appeal under this section may, within 10 days after the date of notice of the action, appeal in writing to the building official. The appeal must be accompanied by an appeal fee as established by Chapter 8.03, and must state: a) The name and address of the appellant; b) The nature of the determination being appealed; c) The reason the determination is incorrect; and d) What the correct determination of the appeal should be. An appellant who fails to file such a statement within the time permitted waives the objections, and the appeal will be dismissed. Except as provided in subsection (5) of this section, the appeal fee is not refundable. 2) If a notice of revocation of a license or permit is the subject of the appeal, the revocation does not take effect until final determination of the appeal. Notwithstanding this paragraph, an emergency suspension will take effect upon issuance of, or such other time stated in, the notice of suspension. 3) Unless the appellant and the City agree to a longer period, an appeal will be scheduled by the Hearings Officer, City Manager or designee within 30 days of the appellant's filing of a complete and timely notice of intent to appeal. 4) The Hearings Officer, City Manager or designee will hear and determine the appeal on the basis of and within the scope of the appellant's written statement and any additional evidence the Hearings Officer, City Manager or designee deems appropriate. The hearing will be conducted under the procedures in Section 9.01.090.021. ( Ord. 2021-08, § 5(Exh. A), 06/07/2021; Ord. 2010-01 § 1, 02/01/2010) Attachment 4 Page 3 of 3 Code Enforcement & Penalties I Eugene Code Code Enforcement &Penalties 9.0200 Inspection and Right of Entry. Page 1 of 4 When necessary to investigate a suspected violation of this land use code, or an application for or revocation of any permit issued under this land use code, the city manager may enter on any site or into any structure open to the public for the purpose of investigation, provided entry is done in accordance with law. Absent a search warrant, no site or structure that is closed to the public shall be entered without the consent of the owner or occupant. No owner or occupant or agent thereof, shall, after reasonable notice and opportunity to comply, refuse to permit entry authorized by this section. If entry is refused, the city manager shall have recourse to the remedies provided by law to secure entry. (Section 9.0200, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0210 Abatement. Any use or structure established, operated, erected, moved, altered, enlarged, painted, or maintained contrary to this land use code is unlawful and a public nuisance, and may be abated as provided in EC Chapter 6. (Section 9.0210, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0220 Legal Proceedings by City Attorney. The city attorney, upon request of the city manager, shall institute any necessary legal proceedings to enforce the provisions of this land use code. The proceedings may include, but are not limited to, suit in circuit court to prohibit the continuance of any use, occupation, building, structure, or sign or the carrying on of other conduct or activities in violation of any provision of this code. (Section 9.0220, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0230 Stop Work Orders. (1) The city manager may order work stopped whenever the city manager has reason to believe work is being performed contrary to this land use code or to a permit issued under this land use code, or that the project for which the work is being performed is in violation of a provision of this land use code. (2) The city shall post a written notice of the stop work order at the project site, or serve such notice on any person engaged in the work or causing such work to be performed. Upon the posting or service of notice, all The Eugene Code is current through Ordinance 20687, passed April 24, 2023. Attachment 5 Page 1 of 4 Code Enforcement & Penalties I Eugene Code Page 2 of 4 persons engaged in the work or causing the work to be performed shall immediately stop such work until authorized in writing by the city manager to proceed. Failure to stop work shall be independent grounds for penalties and additional enforcement actions. (3) Any person to whom a stop work order is issued pursuant to this section may file a written notice of appeal in the manner prescribed in EC 2.021 Appeal Procedures. Notwithstanding any provisions of this code to the contrary, the filing of an appeal shall not stay an order issued hereunder, which shall remain in effect until the final determination of the appeal, or the city manager issues a revised order lifting the stop work order. (Section 9.0230, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0240 Stop Use Orders. (1) The city manager may order a use regulated by this land use code stopped or limited when: (a) The use of any building, structure, or land is contrary to the provisions of this land use code or a permit issued pursuant to this land use code; or (b) The use becomes hazardous to life, health, or property, but only to the extent it poses a danger to life, health, or property. (2) The city shall post a written notice of the stop use order on the property or serve such notice on any person engaged in the use of the property. The notice shall fix a time limit for compliance with the order. After the time limit has expired, no person shall use or occupy a structure, premises, or property or portion thereof in violation of the order. (3) Any person to whom an order is issued pursuant to this section may file a written notice of appeal in the manner prescribed in EC 2.021 Appeal Procedures. Notwithstanding any provisions of this code to the contrary, the filing of an appeal shall not stay an order issued hereunder, which shall remain in effect until the final determination of the appeal, or the city manager issues a revised order lifting the stop use order. (Section 9.0240, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0260 Revocation of Conditional Use Permits. (1) If revocation proceedings are initiated by the planning director, a conditional use permit may be revoked under this section upon a finding by the hearings official that: (a) The permit was issued on the basis of erroneous or misleading information or a material misrepresentation; (b) The development violates the permit or other applicable law; or The Eugene Code is current through Ordinance 20687, passed April 24, 2023. Attachment 5 Page 2 of 4 Code Enforcement & Penalties I Eugene Code Page 3 of 4 (c) There was a failure to pay an administrative penalty as provided under EC Chapter 2 or EC 9.0270 Administrative Civil Penalties for violations relating to the subject development site. (2) The hearings official shall conduct a public hearing concerning a potential revocation of a conditional use permit according to the Type III procedures in this land use code. After a public hearing and determination by the hearings official that one or more of the criteria in subsection (1) are satisfied, the hearings official may, by issuing a written notice of such determination, suspend or revoke a conditional use permit issued under the provisions of this land use code. (3) The permit holder shall be entitled to appeal the decision of the hearings official in the manner provided in EC Chapter 2. (Section 9.0260, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0270 Administrative Civil Penalties. (1) In addition to, and not in lieu of any other enforcement mechanism authorized by this land use code, upon determination by the city manager that a person has violated a provision of this land use code, the city manager may impose an administrative civil penalty, as provided in EC Chapter 2, upon the responsible person. For purposes of this section, "responsible person" includes the violator and, if the violator is not the owner of the building or property at which the violation occurs, the owner. (2) In addition to enforcement mechanisms authorized elsewhere in this code, failure to pay an administrative penalty imposed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section shall be grounds for the city manager to: (a) Withhold issuance of any requested permits or licenses other than those issued pursuant to EC Chapter 8; or (b) Issue a stop work order or stop use order. (Section 9.0270, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) 9.0275 Penalties - Specific. (1) The illegal removal of trees shall be subject to the penalties set forth in EC Chapter 6. (2) Violation of any other provision of this land use code is punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000 for each day the violation exists, or confinement in jail not to exceed 100 days, or both such fine and imprisonment. (Section 9.0275, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) The Eugene Code is current through Ordinance 20687, passed April 24, 2023. Attachment 5 Page 3 of 4 Code Enforcement & Penalties I Eugene Code 9.0280 Remedies - Cumulative. Page 4 of 4 The remedies provided for in sections 9.0200 Inspection and Right of Entry to 9.0275 Penalties - Specific are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. (Section 9.0280, see chart at front of Chapter 9 for legislative history from 2/26/01 through 6/1/02.) The Eugene Code is current through Ordinance 20687, passed April 24, 2023. Disclaimer: The city recorder's office has the official version of the Eugene Code. Users should contact the city recorder's office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. City Website: www.eugene-or.gov Code Publishing Company, A General Code Company The Eugene Code is current through Ordinance 20687, passed April 24, 2023. Attachment 5 Page 4 of 4