Proposed City Law Would Require Septic Inspection at Point of Sale

• Measure Has Been Modified to Address Realtors’ Concerns

BY BILL KOENEKER

A highly controversial municipal law has been proposed that would require inspections of septic systems when any developed real property is transferred is set to air before the Malibu City Council at its meeting next Monday.

Called the point of sale ordinance, the measure would require inspection of an existing onsite wastewater treatment system at or within two years of the time of transfer of title to the property owner served by the septic system, according to municipal officials.

The proposal, which has been bandied about since the beginning of 2007 and was closely scrutinized by the real estate community, according to building officials, would require the city to issue a certificate of inspection, or a conditional certificate of inspection, based on the findings in the official inspection form prepared by a city-approved inspector.

“The issuance of either certificate will authorize the transfer of title between parties,” wrote Craig George, the division manager of the city’s building department.

“Language has also been abridged to clarify the obtainment of an operating permit at the time of real estate transfer of title.”

George said the staff has worked closely with the local association of realtors and took into account feedback from the real estate community.

“A common misconception is that all systems must be upgraded at the time of real estate transfer. A functional system will receive a passing mark. A failed system will be identified and the required alternative necessary to cause the system to again become compliant with the minimum operating requirements will be acknowledged. The intent of the program is to identify and correct those [systems], which pose a risk to public health and safety and the environment,” he added.

A two-year timeline for meeting compliance has been added to the proposed ordinance.

George said Realtors also thought there was a public relations problem and wanted to change the name of the law to “environmental improvement program.”

However, the building official insisted there is no “sound rationale” for not using the traditional planning term.

Realty association members also wanted the time frame of the original ordinance changed from one to three years. “Staff has compromised and has established two years as the time frame for conformance,” George said.

The municipal official indicated several other key factors were incorporated into the proposed ordinance that real estate profesionals wanted, such as the Prop. 13 language to define a transfer of title for the purposes of the proposed ordinance, the city’s obligation to provide a certificate of inspection within five business days, a timeline for a period of compliance for a successor transferee to obtain a certificate of inspection when the original property owner failed to do so, and use of Prop. 13 language to define exceptions, such as interspousal transfer and transfers of title to eligible children and grandchildren.

George said the staff is also recommending that, upon adoption of the new law, a 90-day grace period would be implemented that could serve as a trial period “to test drive the ordinance for both the real estate community and the city.”

The building official acknowledged the city is obligated to adopt a point of sale ordinance because of a memo of understanding signed by the city with the Regional Water Quality Control Board. “Not adopting the point of sale program will prevent the city from satisfying the requirements of the MOU with the RWQCB,” he concluded.