What is the difference between punitive damages and civil penalties?

The trial court bifurcated trial so that punitive damages would be heard after the first phase of trial, and the City reserved its right to have a jury consider punitive damages. On the first day of two court days of closing arguments following the first phase of trial, the City filed a "Trial Brief Re Notice of Election of Remedies" stating it elected to pursue civil remedies instead of punitive damages under the Rent Ordinance. The City argued that where the purpose of civil penalties and punitive damages is the same, a plaintiff may plead both but must eventually elect between them. (Marshall v. Brown (1983) 141 Cal.App.3d 408, 418-419.) According to the City, the civil penalties the City sought served both punitive and deterrent purposes, and the City elected the civil penalties, which would eliminate the need for a jury trial. Specifically, the City sought civil penalties under the Building Code, the Housing Code, and the Business and Professions Code.