Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews code-enforcement data plan and proposed chronic-nuisance ordinance to hold property owners accountable
Summary
Provo staff outlined a multi-part code-enforcement work plan — data reconciliation, public outreach, body-camera deployment for enforcement staff — and presented a draft chronic-nuisance ordinance that would allow civil fines against property owners where repeated emergency-service calls indicate ongoing criminal activity or other violations.
City zoning and police staff presented a multi-pronged update on code enforcement and a draft “chronic nuisance” ordinance intended to give staff additional tools to address properties that generate repeated emergency-service calls and neighborhood harm.
Zoning administrator Scott Thompson reported staff have been reconciling property and mailing-address data and will begin sending letters this week to properties suspected of operating as unlicensed rentals, with the goal of improving licensing compliance. Thompson said he will monitor license applications and enforcement outcomes and provide follow-up reports to council so the impact of the outreach can be measured.
Public-safety Sergeant Bryce Lewis and other staff presented the proposed chronic-nuisance ordinance. Under the draft, a property could be designated a chronic nuisance if it generates either five emergency-service calls within 90 days or ten within 12 months for qualifying offenses (examples listed in the proposal include drug offenses, disorderly conduct, prostitution, repeated violent incidents and rodent/health code issues). Staff emphasized exemptions for good-faith calls such as domestic-violence victims and medical emergencies so that victims are not discouraged from calling for help.
If a property is designated a chronic nuisance, staff would send a written notice requiring owners to take specified remedial steps (for example, enhanced security, cameras, eviction of problem tenants or other targeted corrections). Failure to comply within a set period would expose owners to civil fines (up to $500 per day in the draft) and a formal appeal process was included in the ordinance to provide due process.
Sergeant Lewis illustrated the need for the tool with examples of long-running problems at motel and rental properties where police, code and fire responses were frequent and neighborhood quality of life suffered. Councilors discussed enforcement logistics and stressed that staff should use all statutory tools together rather than sequentially. Staff said they will bring finalized ordinance language and related code revisions to the council for formal consideration in two weeks.
Why this matters: The ordinance is intended to shift some accountability to property owners whose properties foster repeated criminal activity or chronic code violations, enabling civil penalties and compliance plans where other enforcement routes have proven slow or ineffective.
What’s next: Staff will continue license-outreach mailings, pursue data-driven enforcement, coordinate with county health and other departments for complex cases, and return the chronic-nuisance ordinance and consolidated enforcement tools for council action at a future meeting.
