A man walks down Matsui Alley near a vacant home at 1315 22nd St. in midtown Sacramento. The city recent sued the owners of the property, which burned in 2021.
NATHANIEL LEVINE
nlevine@sacbee.com
A controversial proposal to create new enforcement program, funded by fee increases, to address Sacramento’s vacant buildings and blighted lots was shelved during city committee meeting Tuesday.
The city currently has two programs to address neglected properties: requiring weed abatement and mandating landlords register empty lots with the city for a $70 annual fee.
But Sacramento’s policies contain an “enforcement gap” to address illegal dumping, trespassing and “immoral acts,” according to a staff report presented Tuesday during the city of Sacramento’s Law and Legislation committee meeting.
“We have identified several codes within our municipal code that are antiquated,” said Peter Lemos, a chief within the city’s Code and Housing Enforcement.
The city’s programs do not address vacant buildings and storefronts, since these spaces are not required to be enrolled in the existing vacant lot program. Only about half of the eligible properties are registered as vacant lots — 2,514 of the 5,112 parcels city staff have identified.
Council members sitting on the committee said the code enforcement’s new proposals applied a heavy burden to property owners of every size, echoing lobbyists, business advocates and real estate agents who arrived at City Hall to oppose the planned fees.
“There’s nothing surgical in this proposal, it’s an obvious cash grab,” said Matt McDonald, the vice president of local public affairs with the California Apartment Association, a trade group representing rental homes and apartments.
The city staff proposed three different models to inspect all vacant lots and vacant buildings: creating an enforcement team by hiring 22 staff members to inspect properties each month with a $628 fee for landlords; increasing registration and inspection costs for land to $690 and buildings to $887 for landlords; and a combination of both enforcement and registration costs.
The current ordinance has code enforcement officers responding to complaints or to ensure fire safety, said Lemos. There is not a proactive approach, he added.
But the proposal faced blowback from real estate agents, lobbyists and other advocates for properties. Many public speakers requested the council members rely on current programs and penalize irresponsible landlords rather than a single-handed approach targeting everyone.
The fee structure presented Tuesday is too high and requires a rigrious monthly monitoring system and could add financial pressure for property owners, said Tishiana Mann, a policy and economic development manager with the Sacramento Metro Chamber.
Jeff Kessler, the president of the Vacancy Project, said a new enforcement program is necessary because rents would decrease if more landlords were motivated to rent their spaces. However, rents have soared and long-term businesses instead must relocate, he said.
“We are in a housing affordability crisis, and one key issue contributing to that is speculative land hoarding of real estate,” he said.
The new enforcement program comes as the number of vacant lots increased in recent months to 5,115 on Feb. 20 from 4,270 on Sept. 3, according to the city’s presentation.
Councilmember Roger Dickinson said there are two groups of property owners: developers who own land but are deterred by market conditions and longtime owners who are negligent in their maintenance.
“It’s a little bit of a challenge to reconcile those two different world views,” Dickinson said. “It seems to me, personally, I think we need to do more.”
Council members tabled the proposal Tuesday and will discuss a different program with the city’s staff.
Related Stories from Sacramento Bee
The Sacramento Bee
Ishani Desai is a government watchdog reporter for The Sacramento Bee. She previously covered crime and courts for The Bakersfield Californian.