Owning a vacant building or lot in Stockton could become pricier soon.
Stockton is proposing hefty fees on the owners of commercial buildings or vacant lots that are sitting empty when there are no plans to rent, lease or otherwise develop them. Officials roughly estimate, based on a 2022 survey, that there are about 250 vacant buildings in the city.
City Council members indicated last week they are fed up with landlords who are letting commercial buildings remain vacant. They can become blighted magnets for graffiti, trash or worse, like drug use, squatting or intruders who set fires.
Vice Mayor Jason Lee said he couldn’t help but notice the many vacant buildings during his campaign last year for the council.
“Why are all these buildings vacant? It looks like a ghost town,” he said.
The problem is not unique to Stockton. Rampant commercial building vacancies remain a stubborn problem across the country. The COVID-19 pandemic left a legacy of more companies allowing to let employees work from home, leaving less demand for office space. The home delivery revolution has decimated traditional storefront businesses. Some landlords have found creative reuses.
The vacant building problem has long festered in Stockton. In the past, city administrators said they didn’t have enough code enforcement officers to take more action. Now, they say they have enough to start making headway.
“We wanted to do this a lot sooner but we were told there was not enough staffing,” said Councilmember Michael Blower.
Based on a survey of fees in a few other California cities, city staff had proposed requiring owners of vacant buildings to register their properties with the city for $250. At present, there is no registration requirement.
Then, staff suggested the council consider fees of $500 in the second year and $1,000 in the third year if the property remained unoccupied with no plans submitted that would indicate a future use.
The council decided Tuesday, however, that’s not enough. The same fees that were proposed to be assessed annually suddenly became monthly.
Hence, Lee proposed landlords be assessed $250 a month for the first year; $500 a month for the second year and $1,000 a month for the third year. The requirement could potentially generate $3 million for the city. The measure passed unanimously in concept, but must come back to the council for another vote.
Landlords who have a vacant building “should open it up for business, sell it, rent it out or donate it. or do something with it,” he said.