Greeley code compliance staff seek faster enforcement options; council asks for absentee-owner data

Buxton DeMers, manager of Greeley’s Code Compliance Department, briefed the City Council in February 2025 on the department’s scope, typical violations, enforcement workflow and potential changes to landscaping and enforcement practices.

The presentation noted that code compliance focuses on private-property exterior violations, conducts inspections from public rights-of-way and handles issues such as weeds, trash/refuse, inoperable or unlicensed vehicles, oversized vehicle parking, and snow removal. DeMers said inspectors distinguish between ornamental or agricultural landscaping versus “weeds,” and that the department issues a progression of notices (pre-violation courtesy card, courtesy warning mailed to owners, then a notice of violation that can lead to an administrative hearing). He explained the current opportunity to pay a $25 stipulation fee to avoid a hearing if a violation is corrected before the hearing date.

Why it matters: Councilors raised concerns about neighborhood appearance, the county’s aging homeowner population and absentee landlords who do not maintain rental properties. Several councilors urged faster enforcement for repeat or severe problems and requested more robust volunteer or assistance programs for seniors who cannot perform yard maintenance.

Key figures and enforcement outcomes provided by DeMers: about 4,000 cases in 2022, roughly 4,300 in 2023 and about 3,500 in 2024 (staff said lower 2024 counts reflected staffing shortages). DeMers said the department performed more than 7,000 inspections in 2024 and recorded roughly 850 “actions” (phone calls, on-site visits, staff consultations). He reported voluntary compliance rates of roughly 86–88% and said the top violations in 2024 were weeds (720+ cases), trash/refuse (650+ cases) and landscape (370+ cases). Snow-related complaints totaled about 205 so far this year, per DeMers.

Possible enforcement changes and tradeoffs: staff reviewed two broad approaches—maintain the current education-first model emphasizing voluntary compliance, or evaluate a ticketing system that would issue fines after a warning period instead of relying on administrative hearings. DeMers summarized pros (faster resolution, standardized fines, reduced hearing backlog) and cons (need for appeals process, equity and hardship considerations, implementation costs and training).

Council directions and requests: Councilors asked staff to return with more data on the composition of cases sent to hearing (including how many involve absentee landlords), counts of elderly or disabled residents who need assistance and options to improve the volunteer neighborhood-labor program. Several councilors expressed support for a hybrid approach that preserves education and assistance for those unable to comply while enabling a faster path to enforcement for repeat offenders or neglectful absentee owners.

Ending: Staff said they will investigate options for speeding enforcement, review landscaping code clarifications (including questions about agriculture in front yards and artificial turf) and provide follow-up information on absentee owners and assistance programs. No ordinance changes or votes were taken at the work session.