CCMIN 12072021 - Laserfiche WebLink

• Councilmember Balch stated this is still a gray area for him. He advised he would be agreeable to the staffs recommendation for vehicles to be permissible smoking areas. Assistant City Attorney Seto confirmed the proposed language does not permit smoking in a vehicle. Councilmember Balch clarified he would allow smoking in a vehicle, contrary to the staffs recommendation. Councilmember Balch stated the private-party suit should be a separate item. He advised if you are at your fourth or fifth violation then perhaps it should be the basis for a lawsuit. Interim City Manager Dolan stated the item could be continued if the Council need more time to make the decision or if the Council wants to impose a set number of violations before it takes effect. City Attorney Dan Sodergren stated this is also tied to administrative penalty provisions in the PMC. In response to City Attorney Sodergren, Assistant City Attorney Seto clarified the administrative enforcement mechanisms are on a rolling 12-month basis. She clarified Councilmember Balch is discussing the private lawsuit section and this would not be the basis to support a private lawsuit unless someone had four violations. City Attorney Sodergren expressed his initial misunderstanding with what was being discussed. Councilmember Balch stated he would not like it to be where a single violation would not be the basis of a lawsuit, adding he will not support frivolous lawsuits in Pleasanton. He advised the basis of frivolous can be debated. He stated he wants there to be some process evaluated by the City before a private suit can be filed. Assistant City Attorney Seto clarified the City would not be evaluating the process. She advised this could be a situation where if a neighbor wants to sue over two violations the City will not say they cannot sue them. She stated he is asking to change the language in the PMC to make it four violations but a potential litigant could always access public records to show there have been two violations and this could conceivably be enough to convince a judge there is a private nuisance. She stated it would be hard for her to judge what would be the basis to support a private nuisance accusation for not knowing the damages the litigant would be arguing. City Attorney Sodergren stated it often happens in a noise context where you can still bring a private nuisance action even if it does not violate a City ordinance's noise thresholds. He advised it is on a specific case basis so it can be hard to generalize. Mayor Brown stated she is unsure if they have the authority to prohibit those lawsuits, but advised it is a good goal. Councilmember Balch stated he did not want the first violation to be the basis for a lawsuit. Mayor Brown stated they cannot control this as Councilmembers. In response to City Attorney Sodergren, Councilmember Balch confirmed he is looking to strike Section 9.27.045.A as he does not want residents to enforce a City code but rather just be able to bring a general nuisance lawsuit. Assistant City Attorney Seto clarified the section about lease violations is in Section 9.027.035. City Council Minutes Page 12 of 18 December 7,2021