neighborhood preservation
and improvement act
DPA
|
Committee on Counties & Municipalities |
|
|
X |
Committee on Appropriations |
|
|
|
Caucus and COW |
This bill as passed the Senate contains an Appropriation clause. |
|
|
As Passed the House |
|
SB 1347 is designated as “the neighborhood preservation and improvement act”. The bill outlines statutory procedures and requirements relating to drug contaminated properties and establishes requirements on liquor establishments regarding activities occurring in parking lots and revocation of liquor licenses. The bill allows a government agency to require an on-site apartment complex manager to submit fingerprints for a criminal records check and outlines programs which the manager may be required to attend. SB 1347 makes various changes to liquor laws and licensing requirements. The bill appropriates $25,000 in FY 2001-2002 from the state general fund to the Arizona neighborhood preservation and investment fund, $200,000 in FY 2001-2002 and in FY 2002-2003 from the state general fund to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (DLLC) to fund four special investigators to work exclusively in the neighborhood association interaction and liquor enforcement management unit, $200,000 in FY 2001-2002 for the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for developing contaminated property clean up standards and $160,000 in FY 2001-2002 and FY 2002-2003 to ADEQ to hire two employees to implement the provisions of this legislation.
Laws 2000, Chapter 202 established the Arizona Neighborhood Preservation and Investment Commission. The legislation outlined the Commission’s makeup, powers and duties and established the Arizona neighborhood preservation and investment fund consisting of monies provided from a variety of sources. The Commission was then authorized to grant monies from the fund to cities to fund neighborhood preservation and investment projects. SB 1347 appropriates $25,000 in the next fiscal year from the state general fund to the Arizona neighborhood and investment fund.
Ø The methods prescribed by ADEQ’s remediation standards of practice.
Ø Having an environmental professional or licensed contractor physically remove contaminated porous surfaces and decontaminate nonporous surfaces with an appropriate cleaning solution.
Ø Having an environmental professional or licensed contractor attest that the portion of real property does not presently pose a risk from the residual contamination if persons are allowed to occupy the area.
· Allows all of the following to occur once ADEQ issues a compliance letter that remediation methods have been applied to the property:
Ø The owner, landlord, or manager may disregard notice requirements.
Ø Any person may use, enter, occupy, rent and sell the property.
Ø Any person may remove the notice of removal posted by a peace officer.
· Allows ADEQ to issue a compliance letter through its voluntary remediation program and to apply any part of that program it determines is applicable to the remediation of the property.
· Requires ADEQ to issue or decline to issue a compliance letter within ten business days after receipt of documentation showing that any authorized remediation methods have been properly applied.
· Clarifies that a state or local government and its employees shall not be held liable for costs or damages incurred resulting from the implementation of the drug property cleanup provisions of this act unless the damages occurred from gross negligence or intentional misconduct.
· Clarifies that a judicial officer may take into account whether the accused is manufacturing any drug found in a drug test submitted to the court, when determining the method of release or amount of bail.
· States monies in the water quality assurance revolving fund shall not be used for any costs associated with drug property cleanup, except for reimbursing a political subdivision for its costs in response to a threat of a release of a hazardous substance or pollutants that present an immediate and substantial endangerment to the public health or the environment.
· Allows a government agency to a require an on-site manager of a residential rental property that is determined to be a nuisance or slum property consisting of 20 or more units to:
Ø Submit a full set of fingerprints and pay the fingerprinting fee to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) for the purposes of a criminal records check. Requires the manager to bear the cost of obtaining the criminal records check.
Ø Attend any crime prevention and abatement programs offered by the city, town or county in which the property is located.
· Appropriates $25,000 in FY 2001-2002 from the state general fund to the Arizona neighborhood preservation and investment fund for the purpose of providing grants for the improvement of declining areas in cities and towns.
· Appropriates $200,000 in FY 2001-2002 and FY 2002-2003 from the state general fund to DLLC for hiring four special investigators that work exclusively in the neighborhood association interaction and liquor enforcement management unit.
· Appropriates $200,000 in FY 2001-2002 from the state general fund to ADEQ to pay for the independent study to develop and recommend standards for the cleanup of contaminated property.
· Appropriates $160,000 in FY 2001-2002 and in FY 2002-2003 from the state general fund to ADEQ for hiring two full-time employees to implement contaminated property laws.
· Makes other technical and conforming changes
SB 1347 was amended in the Counties &
Municipalities Committee as follows:
·
Stipulates that a peace officer may not publish the
notice of removal for a drug property on the law enforcement agency’s web site
unless the owner fails to remediate the contamination.
·
States that the property owner may have an
environmental professional treat the contaminated porous surfaces in a drug
property rather than just remove those surfaces.
·
Clarifies the definition of real property.