HomeMy WebLinkAbout38-City Attorney
"",-" ,J"',' '. '" ~,,,
,"~ '
, ZT '''N/''''
.' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: JAMES F. PENMAN
CITY ATTORNEY
Subject: Suspension of Enforcement of Chapters 8.35
and 8.39 of the San Bernardino Municipal
Code.
Dept: City Attorney
Date: June 1,2005
ORIGINAL
Synopsis of Previous Council Action:
March 21,2005 - Ordinance adopted adding Chapter 8.35 to Title 8 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code.
August 16,2004 - Ordinance adopted adding Chapter 8.39 to Title 8 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code.
Recommended Action:
None.
Contact person: James F. Penman
Supporting data attached: Staff Reoort
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
Phone:
Ward:
None
5255
All
Source:
Finance:
Committee Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No.
*?~
~ \ 10 l bS
SDEled[Chap8.3S.8.39SBMC.rca]
-- "~,
;a;o>,~,o-,"'.''C,-'."~>''''';'.i' -,
~,o"n , ,~ ~
""~~"".'r~'~~'~'~~'-' n -~ '-', "r""'~"~"'" ~:':"''':b'''il''_'~~''*'' ~""'c_"'_"'" ~k_~~ -~n"'''l,i'''",~", _ "
,
STAFF REPORT
Council Meeting Date: .June 6. 2005
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
Mayor and Common Council
James F. Penman, City Attorney
June 6, 2005
Suspension of Enforcement of Chapters 8.35 and 8.39 of the San
Bernardino Municipal Code
Chapter 8.35 of the Municipal Code allows the Police Department to seize vehicles used by
persons to solicit prostitute or drug purchases. The vehicles may be impounded for thirty (30) days.
Chapter 8.35 allows the seizure and forfeiture of vehicles involved in illegal dumping. Both
ordinances were based on an ordinance enacted by the City of Oakland. The City of Oakland's
ordinance was upheld by an appellate court in San Francisco in Horton v. City of Oakland in 2000.
Subsequently other cities enacted ordinances similar to Oakland's ordinance. On April 22,
2005, the Court of Appeal in Sacramento held that the City of Stockton's ordinance was
unconstitutional and that State law preempted Stockton's ordinance. The Stockton case, O'Connell
v. The City of Stockton, creates some uncertainty due to the conflicting opinion in the Oakland case.
The City Attorney's office is recommending that enforcement of Chapters 8.35 and 8.39 be
suspended for the time being. The City of Stockton has asked the State Supreme Court to review
the issue of preemption. Stockton is rewriting the provisions of its ordinance relating to the timing
of the post-seizure hearing.
Enforcement of these chapters of the Municipal Code must be suspended pending the
Supreme Court's decision to review this issue.
RLS/js [Suspension.8taffReport]