Aldermen advance bill to increase fines, create grant split to tackle vacant properties

Alderman Velasquez presented Board Bill 170 on behalf of a group of sponsors and the Public Safety Committee voted to advance the measure out of committee with a due-pass recommendation.

The bill creates two new, higher penalties aimed at repeat owners of vacant or unsecured buildings and at unpermitted demolitions. Under the measure, an initial fine for unsecured or vacant non-owner-occupied properties would start at $500 with subsequent fines at $1,000; unpermitted demolitions would carry a penalty of $30,000 or one-half of the appraised value of the property, whichever is greater. The bill directs that proceeds from the new fines be added to the existing Vacant Building Initiative Fund and splits receipts: half to that fund and half to the Community Development Administration (CDA) to support grants for community groups addressing blight and vacancy. The bill as amended sets an effective date of Sept. 1, 2025 to allow time for hiring and training staff.

Why it matters: Alderman Velasquez said the bills respond to voter approval of Proposition B and to the prevalence of vacant buildings in St. Louis. She told the committee that an ad hoc review found roughly 14,000 properties with outstanding code violations representing about $21.6 million in back fines and fees and roughly $2.7 million in back taxes. "These fines and fees have not kept up with inflation, and they clearly have not been effective," Alderman Velasquez said during her presentation.

Key provisions and implementation: The bill (as amended) adds the two new penalty types, routes new revenue into the vacant building fund and CDA grants, and exempts accessory structures as defined by chapter 26.08.020. Sponsors also added or clarified references to existing code sections (including chapter 25 references to secure buildings and vacant building maintenance). The committee adopted five sponsor amendments to change the effective date, narrow some wording, add code cross-references, restore certain enforcement language, and exempt accessory buildings from the new penalties. The committee included a fiscal note that funds four additional positions (two in the Building Division and two in the council office) to improve collections and enforcement; an ad hoc pilot effort last year collected about $250,000, the bill’s backers said.

Support and enforcement perspective: Commissioner Ware of the Building Division told the committee the division supports the bill and that the effective-date delay was necessary to allow hiring and systems changes. Retired Sergeant John McLaughlin, who coordinates problem-property work for the Building Division, testified that the measure “fills up our toolbox” and will help hold noncompliant owners accountable. Peter Hoffman of Legal Services of Eastern Missouri and representatives of neighborhood and housing groups testified in support, with Hoffman saying the bill targets the most serious violations—unpermitted demolitions and unsecured properties—that pose public-safety and health risks.

Opposition and limits: Testimony noted practical limits to enforcement against out-of-state owners or LLCs, including the difficulty of jailing corporate owners. Sponsors acknowledged some cases will remain difficult to resolve, and the Building Division emphasized collection and administrative mechanisms in companion legislation (Board Bills 169 and 171).

Procedure and outcome: The committee adopted the sponsor amendments by voice and roll calls where requested and advanced Board Bill 170 as amended out of committee with a due-pass recommendation. The final motion to advance was made and seconded on the record; the committee chair announced the measure as "in bank" and later reported it out with a due-pass recommendation.

What’s next: Because the bill changes enforcement and funding flows, sponsors and the Building Division said agencies will need to coordinate on collection procedures and hiring. The bill’s Sept. 1, 2025 effective date is intended to allow that work.

Ending note: Sponsors presented the measure as compliance-focused rather than punitive; the Building Division retains authority to waive fines in special circumstances, and the CDA grant component is intended to give community groups resources to respond to vacancy.