Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Nuisance Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees authorize multiple nuisance abatements, certify costs to county auditor
Summary
At the Sept. 10 meeting the trustees adopted a series of resolutions declaring properties nuisances for debris and excessive vegetation and certified abatement expenses to the Hamilton County auditor for assessment to property tax duplicates.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Nuisance Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Delhi Township trustees on Sept. 10 adopted a series of resolutions finding nuisances for accumulated debris and excessive vegetation at multiple addresses and moved to certify abatement expenses to the Hamilton County auditor.
Community Development Director Roach told the board the early set of resolutions covered debris and vegetation cases; in some instances the staff believes the property owner may be deceased. Resolutions ordered abatements and, where the township carried out work, authorized certification of those expenses to the county auditor to appear on the January tax duplicate as liens against the properties.
The meeting record shows trustees moved to dispense with second readings and adopted multiple nuisance resolutions (numbers 2025‑176 through 2025‑189 and others), and later two separate resolutions certified specific abatement expenses for several addresses to the auditor. Director Roach clarified that the certified amounts reflect contractor abatement costs and administrative expenses incurred by the township; the board approved forwarding those totals to the auditor so they can be collected via property tax assessment.
Trustees asked clarifying questions about specific properties during the presentation, including whether piles or dumpsters visible in displayed photos were part of the abatement scope; Roach clarified that at least one nearby dumpster belonged to a neighboring property and was not part of the township’s abatement work. The resolutions were standard code‑enforcement actions to address public‑health and safety concerns; no litigation or additional appeals were recorded at the meeting.

