Report 2015-134 Recommendation 17 Responses

Report 2015-134: Residential Building Records: The Cities of San Rafael, Novato, and Pasadena Need to Strengthen the Implementation of Their Resale Record Programs (Release Date: March 2016)

Recommendation #17 To: San Rafael, City of

To ensure that property owners correct violations in a timely manner, San Rafael should follow through with its enforcement policies, such as issuing notice letters.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2017

As previously reported, on December 5, 2016, the San Rafael City Council adopted Resolution No. 14323, which sets forth policies, practices and procedures for the Residential Building Record Program. The enforcement portion of the program is currently being implemented consistent with this resolution and there have been no changes or amendments to it since its adoptions. No further action is needed on this item.

  • Completion Date: July 2017

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented

San Rafael previously reported that it is up to date with its enforcement actions for violations from 2015 and later. San Rafael subsequently demonstrated to us that it has a process in place for addressing the backlog from 2014. It determined that an overwhelming number of violations have been addressed and resolved. Those remaining (about 10 percent) are being addressed through the Trakit permit tracking program.


1-Year Agency Response

The City has adopted policies, practices and procedures for administering and enforcing the Residential Building Record Program. These policies, practices and procedures are outlined in City Resolution No. 14243, adopted by the San Rafael City Council on December 5, 2016. A copy of this resolution is provided as a supplement to this response.

  • Completion Date: March 2016
  • Response Date: March 2017

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

Although San Rafael is up to date with its enforcement actions for violations from 2015 and later, it has yet to follow through with addressing violations from previous years.

  • Auditee did not address all aspects of the recommendation

6-Month Agency Response

Procedures have been developed for City staff to implement follow-up and enforcement. The procedures will be submitted once finalized. Currently, all violations are followed up with a Notice and Order within 10 business days. Further, as discussed in the May 21, 2016 memorandum submitted to Myriam Czarniecki, enforcement for the backlog of violations for 2015 has been initiated and many cases have been resolved. We are now commencing with the enforcement of the 2014 backlog.

  • Completion Date: June 2016
  • Response Date: September 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

According to the Community Development Director, as of November 2016 the city had not yet commenced follow up on 2014 resale record reports. In addition, the city did not provide us evidence that demonstrates that it is following up on violations within 10 business days. However, we reviewed the city's report for 2016, and the report indicates that the city has issued notice letters as well as closed many of the violations it identified. We look forward to learning of the city's progress when it submits its one-year response.


60-Day Agency Response

See responses to recommendations #10 and #14 and the May 12, 2016 memorandum forwarded to Myriam Czarniecki. Enforcement has been initiated and the Notice & Order process has been used to seek resolution of violations.

  • Estimated Completion Date: Being implemented; on-going
  • Response Date: May 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Partially Implemented


All Recommendations in 2015-134

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader