###

PREVIOUSLY: Eureka City Council Narrowly Passes Vacant Building Ordinance that Aims to Reduce Blight Across Town

###

When the Eureka City Council passed a contentious Vacant Building Ordinance a little over a year ago, owners of long-neglected buildings and blighted properties braced for hefty monthly fines, but the city never came to collect. Why?

Not long after the ordinance was approved, the City of Eureka’s legal team caught wind of a lawsuit challenging San Francisco’s “Empty Homes Tax,” a voter-passed initiative that sought to open the city’s housing stock to new renters by imposing steep penalties  — $2,500 to $5,000 per unit — on property owners whose units sat vacant for more than 182 days a year. The lawsuit, brought forth by a coalition of San Francisco property owners and realtors, is still making its way through the courts.

“We’re waiting on the results of [the lawsuit] so that we’re not in any sort of legal bind,” Eureka City Manager Miles Slattery told the Outpost in a recent phone interview. “[San Francisco’s] tax is different, but it definitely has some bearing on our ordinance … enough that our legal [team] wants to see how it pans out before we do any enforcement.”

While the City of Eureka has been eager to find new ways to increase access to much-needed affordable housing, the intent of the Vacant Building Ordinance is to fix the city’s blight problem, not to punish landlords with empty units. 

The city’s ordinance, adopted in September 2024, required property owners to maintain and monitor vacant buildings — both residential and commercial — that are not “actively being offered for sale, lease, or rent.” If a building is not maintained for 30 days or more, owners will be subject to a fine of $1,000 per month. After a year, the fine jumps to $5,000 per month.

There are a few exceptions. If there is an active permit and the owner is actively working to repair, rehabilitate or demolish the building, they’re probably exempt from enforcement. People with extenuating circumstances may also seek an exemption. 

“Not all of these properties are necessarily delinquent,” Slattery said, noting that the city has an abatement process for buildings with health and safety issues. “We have vacant properties that could be not only better utilized, but also potentially used for housing and other purposes. [The council] thought that by passing something like this, [the city] would encourage development and encourage people not to leave their property vacant.”

Asked what’s next for Eureka’s ordinance, Slattery said the city’s legal team will keep an eye on the ongoing lawsuit.

“Council chose to move forward with it, but it’s not going to be enforced until we get a ruling on this,” he said. “We’ve had discussions about doing different things, like putting a moratorium on the ordinance, but we haven’t chosen to do that because we’re hoping that this case will come to a resolution and we can either make amendments and move forward, or not.”

On Oct. 31, 2024, the San Francisco Superior Court ruled that the city’s Empty Homes Tax violates federal and state law. The court issued an order prohibiting the city from enforcing or administering the tax.

The City and County of San Francisco filed an appeal on Dec. 27, 2024. While there’s been a lot of pretrial activity over the past year, the appellate court has yet to issue a decision.