Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Blight Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council committee backs clearer enforcement for uninhabitable dwellings and blight complaints
Summary
Committee discussed an amendment to ordinance 38‑11 to ease enforcement against people living in uninhabitable structures and reviewed existing nuisance code enforcement gaps for blighted properties, with staff promising training and better interdepartmental coordination.
A proposed amendment to city ordinance 38‑11 that would make it easier for police to remove people from uninhabitable dwellings and to hold landlords accountable drew detailed discussion at the Public Safety Committee meeting.
Attorney Edwards and Deputy Chief White described the amendment as removing some of the ambiguity officers previously faced. Reading from committee discussion, Edwards summarized that the approach focuses on the condition of the structure rather than tenants’ property rights: the property is uninhabitable "therefore, you must leave because it, causes a, a threat to health and safety." Deputy Chief White said SPD will begin roll‑call training for supervisors and officers so enforcement is consistent across the department.
Public commenters urged stronger action on blighted and abandoned properties. Jean Paul (public comment) said problems at vacant houses — including illegal activity and dangerous dogs — persist and asked the council to monitor enforcement of nuisance laws. Jean Paul noted that Chapter 58 of the city's code allows daily fines or jail for owners who let blight persist.
Council members and staff agreed to coordinate enforcement: police will document incidents and forward reports to property standards and the community‑oriented policing bureau for follow‑up. Attorney Edwards said landlords may be punishable under the proposed amendment and that the change was intended to make police enforcement more straightforward.
Committee discussion included alternatives for identifying problem properties, such as using sanitation workers and postal carriers as eyes on the street to flag vacant or blighted houses. Council members emphasized the need for a repeatable reporting and follow‑up process so properties remain secured after occupants are removed.
Ending: With committee support, staff said they will provide training to SPD officers, set up a clearer reporting path to property standards and the community policing bureau, and return with implementation details after the ordinance is processed for final Council consideration.
