MANDATORY CONTAINER SERVICE; COUNCIL RESOLUTION 72-7

Home Browse Search

~u~-o ~l ~~ -!3 Ron Wolford Dir. Pub. Works ~~ To: - ~-.~ __~.. Date F .- Char~.es J. Liberto, Deputes City Attorney 6-12-72 iubject: _~aIld.1t_Q~S2.II~~].ILP~ Service; Council Resolution 72-7 The City Attorney's Office cannot prosecute failure of an apartment building.owner with four or more dwellings to obey a Mandate set down by council resolution. Resolutions normally have force and effect as to ministerial acts to be performed by the City or city officers and are not normally adopted to prohibit acts by members of the public and even if they should do so they do not normally provide penalties for failure to perform such acts, unless of course the City is given specific authority under its Charter to so prohibit and so penalize by resolution rather than by ordinance. The Santa Ana City Charter makes no such provision®. In fact the~Charter specifically provides that the "rights and powers conferred on the City Council shall be exercised by ordinance when so provided by this Charter or by law.°' Each act of the City Council establishing a fine or other penalty or granting a franchise shall be done by ordinance." City Charter Section 413 The Charter further provides that the Council may provide penalties only ,for violation of its ordinances and may only provide that violations ~f its ordinances are misdemeanors prosecutable in the name of the People of the State of California. City Charter Section 420' Section 16-32(d)(2) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code specifies the power of the City Council to establish by resolution the standard container or standard containers to be so used by property owners and also provides that if such a resolution establishes such a requirement or requirements has been adopted and notice thereof given, as the Council shall direct then the agency collecting reuse may refuse to take any refuse that is not placed in the required type of container, or in an approved container, or so bundled or packaged as to meet the requirements of such resolution. This evidently is the only means of enforcement provided under our ordinances or allowed under our Charter. If Section 16-32 had provided that any such resolution by the City Council would have the effect of rule of law and would be subject to the penalty provisions of the SAMC then we would be able to enforce the use of the containers specified by resolution, by prosecution. Resolutions are normally used to specify certain modes of conduct only where those specifications are somewhat temporary in contrast to the use of ordinances for imposing permanent directions and orders. It appears as if the specification for use of these specific types of containers is a somewhat permanent order by the ~^•City Council and it's suggested that required use of such containers be made in ordinance form:lso that the owners refusing to use the ~e