Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Vehicles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Vernon council hears plan to update vehicle-blight rules, create code-enforcement department
Summary
Mount Vernon city council members on the legislative docket discussed draft changes to Chapter 1309 of the city codified ordinances that would tighten rules and enforcement procedures for inoperable, unregistered and junk vehicles on public streets and private property, and heard an overview of a proposed Code Enforcement Department that would centralize property maintenance, zoning and utility inspection work.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Vehicles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Vernon city council members on the legislative docket discussed draft changes to Chapter 1309 of the city codified ordinances that would tighten rules and enforcement procedures for inoperable, unregistered and junk vehicles on public streets and private property, and heard an overview of a proposed Code Enforcement Department that would centralize property maintenance, zoning and utility inspection work.
The proposed ordinance "would be ordinance to revise chapter 1309 of the codified ordinances regulating inoperable, unregistered, and junk vehicles, trailers, and other motorized equipment on city streets and private property," Councilmember Janice Keener told the council, summarizing the draft language and the goals behind it.
The change follows work by city inspectors and code-enforcement staff who told the council existing language is “a little vague'' and placed much of the practical enforcement burden on the police department. Scott Zimmerman, identified in the meeting as the city inspector, and Brian Marvin, identified as the city’s code enforcement officer, told council they had found enforcement gaps while doing field checks.
"As I started cleaning this up, I started finding some difficulties," Marvin said, describing vehicles abandoned in alleys, yards and streets. He said his office has already removed or caused the removal of more than 60 vehicles (55 removed by owners and nine towed by others), with about 22 cases pending and 14 undelivered notices on file.
Marvin said the intent of the draft revisions is to make the ordinance’s expectations plain so residents know what the city will enforce and so staff can administer the rules efficiently. "Ninety percent of the time, people are completely cooperative," he said. He described routine steps used now: photographing vehicles, sending ordinance-based letters and, in some cases, coordinating with the police department for a supervised tow.
Council members asked how the rules would treat hobbyists and restorers who keep project cars at home. "If you're going to do that kind of hobby ... you need to have the facility ... behind a fence somewhere out of sight of the general public," Marvin said, adding the draft requires inoperative vehicles to be kept out of public view and, when stored for repair, to sit on an improved surface to avoid soil contamination from leaking fluids.
Councilmember Mahan asked how often enforcement staff conduct patrols; Marvin said code checks are part of his daily routine and that it typically takes about 10 minutes to find a single vehicle issue while on patrol. Keener and Marvin said the draft would give staff clear, and in some cases lengthened, time frames to work with residents so enforcement is consistent and not arbitrary.
Separately, Safety/administration staff outlined a proposed Code Enforcement Department that would consolidate property maintenance, zoning permits, and utility-related inspection programs such as backflow prevention and FOG (fats, oils and grease) compliance. The presentation said the new department would use OpenGov permitting and a centralized database to track inspections, annual testing (for example, licensed backflow testers), and permit compliance.
The council did not vote on the ordinance. Keener requested a 10-minute committee meeting at the next council session to continue the discussion and invited members for ride-alongs with code staff to view ongoing cases.
Why it matters: Council members framed the changes as housekeeping to make enforcement consistent and transparent, while reducing the ad hoc burden on police. The proposal affects property standards, environmental protections (through improved surfaces for stored vehicles) and neighborhood appearance.
What’s next: Ordinance 2025-23 (Chapter 1309 changes) received its first reading; council scheduled a 10-minute committee meeting to revisit the draft. Administration representatives also said they will return with details on the proposed Code Enforcement Department ordinance (Ordinance 2025-17 had a second reading the same night).

