HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter PSARPacic.�-
Southwestc
Ssoaation of
r REALTORS"
www.psar.org
Serving East and South San Diego County
March 11, 2014
Honorable Mayor Ron Morrison
and National City Councilmembers
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, CA 91950
Dear Mayor Morrison and Councilmembers:
On behalf of the 2,000 members of the Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS, I want to express
our strong opposition to a draft ordinance that would create confusing rules and guidelines for smoking
in multi -family properties including condominium properties owned by private individuals.
The draft ordinance is deficient in the following areas:
• There is no smoking -related data for National City to measure the benefits v. costs of the ordinance
• It's unclear where the enforcement will occur within the city's departments (see page 11 B)
• It gives third parties the ability to sue without giving a city agency the ability to review and resolve
charges (see page 12 A-D)
Our industry already has the tools to resolve smoking related complaints without requiring the adoption
of additional local ordinances. Property managers have the authority to regulate smoking in their
apartment complexes and are familiar with state statutes regulating lawful tenants (those that sign the
rental agreement) since the California Association of REALTORS included a check off in their standard
rental form that asks if a tenant plans to smoke in their unit. As of June 1, 2012, Senate Bill 332 (Chapter
264, Statutes of 2011), became state law and authorizes rental property owners to prohibit and/or
restrict smoking of tobacco products on their properties. This law is having a significant impact on
restricting tobacco use in residential projects. We have attached a copy of the rental form with that
language.
Property managers and landlords also have the power to evict tenants that pose a nuisance to other
tenants if they ignore apartment owners' rules that outline where smoking can occur in common areas
outside of residences.
Homeowner associations also have guidelines regarding where common interest (condo) owners can
smoke in common areas outside of residential units.
With all these guidelines that are currently being enforced by apartment managers and common
interest property management firms, our Association and its members do not see a need for additional
regulations being adopted by the city since standards are currently in place for regulating smoking on
multi -family properties.
We request the Mayor and City Council to reject the boiler plate generic ordinance that has been
circulated by the American Lung Association to your city and throughout the United States in their hopes
that cities will adopt such ordinances without looking at the restrictions that private property owners
and managers already have in place to regulate activities that occur on their properties.
We ask the city to verify information that should be known before the city proceeds with an ordinance
including the following:
1. Is there a database of smoking complaints in the code enforcement or public safety departments
your National City staff can provide to show this is a major issue?
2. With the declining number of smokers in the region, does the city expect to accomplish the Lung
Association's goal of 100% no smoking in multifamily housing with housing penalties versus
providing better education via a public information campaign?
3. There appear to be sufficient regulations at the state level for rental housing and common interest
managers to use to limit smoking in multi -family complexes which don't create a higher liability for
the property manager, so why does National City need a new ordinance when they should utilize
and encourage the use of tools that are already available at the state level?
4. How will the issues of protection of medical marijuana users be handled by the city since it's
typically smoked?
5. Does National City have the staffing to follow up on smoking complaints and what are the steps they
might follow to provide an initial warning and referral of violators to participate in smoking
cessation programs?
6. The restrictions on ownership units cannot be implemented by an HOA since the HOA cannot
designate which owners can or cannot smoke in their units but can already regulate the location of
common areas for smoking or no smoking.
7. Has the Building Industry Association provided a reply to the requirement for the recommended
100% smoking ban for newly constructed units? If so, what was their response?
8. Does the City Council understand that the civil penalty included in the ordinance will empower the
Lung Association to sue property owners and tenants increasing housing costs if property owners or
managers have to defend themselves from frivolous lawsuits?
We appreciate the Mayor and City Council's support of our request to abandon the draft ordinance and
work with our Association members and members of the San Diego County Apartment Association in a
partnership with the private sector to monitor our industries current regulation of smoking activities
that occur on their private properties.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
Rakre 6e e'u'
Robert Oliveri, President
Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS
cc: San Diego County Apartment Association
Building Industry of San Diego
California Association of REALTORS