Logo courtesy of Sutter County

YUBA CITY, CA (MPG) - Ignoring property violations in Sutter County could bring fines of up to $5,000 per violation per day under a proposed enforcement overhaul that also gives residents more opportunities to correct problems before penalties begin.

The Board of Supervisors introduced two ordinances last month and approved new enforcement policies following a review of the county’s handling of building, zoning and nuisance complaints. The ordinances return Oct. 13 for adoption.

Development Services Assistant Director James Stephens said the process would begin with a 30-day courtesy notice for routine violations that do not threaten health or safety. Continued noncompliance would prompt another inspection and a formal notice explaining the problem, corrective requirements and potential penalties.

“We’re going to spell it all out for them, make it as easy for them as possible,” Stephens said.

Residents who disagree with a violation could request a department review and present evidence before receiving an administrative citation. They would also have an opportunity to appeal a citation to a county hearing officer.

Stephens said the sequence of notices, inspections and review opportunities would give people at least 90 days to resolve nonemergency violations before the first fine.

The proposed penalties begin at $500, increase to $750 for a second violation or continued noncompliance, and rise to $1,000 for a third. Further increases could reach the daily maximum, with fines exceeding $1,000 requiring authorization from the Development Services director.

The changes would also expand responsibility beyond property owners. Tenants, contractors, business operators, property managers and others who cause or allow violations could face enforcement action, county officials said.

A citation could carry additional expenses. Stephens said the county already charges $200 an hour for enforcement work and would begin recovering those costs when a case reaches the citation stage, including work dating to the first inspection.

His example totaled $1,400, combining the initial fine with $900 for inspections and notices.

Supervisor Jeff Stephens questioned how the county would handle dangerous conditions when an owner refuses to act. He described an overgrown field near homes where residents feared a fire.

James Stephens said urgent conditions would be handled according to their severity rather than the courtesy-notice timeline. In a potential fire hazard case, Development Services would consult county fire personnel to determine whether immediate action was warranted.

If violations remain unresolved through the enforcement process, the county could seek a warrant to enter the property and remove the nuisance, then recover its expenses.

Unpaid cleanup and enforcement costs could be placed on property tax bills through a special assessment, James Stephens said. The department has about $200,000 in outstanding fees from existing cases that could be brought before supervisors for collection.

People with open violations would receive information about the changes, officials said. If their cases remain unresolved when the ordinances take effect, the department intends to issue new notices and begin the revised process.

Supervisors also approved up to $30,000 for two handheld radios and related equipment to connect enforcement personnel with sheriff’s dispatch.

James Stephens said unreliable cellphone service in rural areas can leave inspectors without a dependable way to request assistance when they encounter threatening situations.