Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Notice Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kankakee code committee seeks clearer notice rules after residents receive short compliance windows
Summary
Committee members said mailed violation notices sometimes arrive late and proposed policy changes — including more consistent door‑knockers and longer effective compliance periods — to avoid one‑day deadlines resulting from mail delays.
Committee members raised concerns Aug. 21 about the city’s code‑enforcement mailing and compliance process after a resident received a notice with a one‑day compliance window because of postal delays. Members discussed using door‑knockers more consistently, adding a multi‑step notice process, and adjusting how the compliance period is calculated to allow mail transit time.
Aldermen described a case in which a violation letter dated Aug. 15 was not stamped at the post office until Aug. 20 and was received by the homeowner on Aug. 21; the letter listed an Aug. 22 compliance date. Committee members said that timeline can leave residents little or no time to respond. One alderman suggested counting compliance periods from the date the post office stamps delivery rather than the date the letter is prepared.
Director Nelson described the department’s current approach to enforcement timeframes and the typical distinctions among violation types: trash, vehicles and grass issues often carry shorter compliance windows (three days for some items), while exterior paint and trim requests commonly allow 30 days. Nelson said the department tries to use courtesy notices and door‑knockers when feasible and that staff will work with residents who call to request more time.
Committee members asked the director to place the city’s mailing and compliance policy on the next committee agenda so members and staff can review possible changes, including adding consistent door‑knocker use, clarifying whether mail transit should be counted in compliance periods, and whether a two‑step notification (notice of observed problem followed by a compliance notice) should be used for non‑urgent items. The committee did not adopt an ordinance amendment at the meeting; members described the item as an internal policy matter to be reviewed next month.
