City council sends proposed downtown vacant-structure registry to committee after equity concerns

The Mobile City Council on Tuesday, Sept. 9, agreed to refer a proposed ordinance establishing a vacant-structure registry for parts of downtown to committee after Councilor Carroll raised concerns about whether the measure would be applied equitably across the city.

The proposal, introduced as an amendment to Chapter 52 (property maintenance and enforcement) creating an Article 8 vacant-structure registry covering properties including Henry Aaron Loop, would declare several structures public nuisances and authorize demolition orders in some cases. Councilor Carroll questioned why the ordinance was limited to downtown when vacant-building problems also exist in other neighborhoods and raised concerns about fines and potential financial pressure on owners.

Councilor Carroll said, "how do we address the equal justice under the law law portion of this, meaning that only we're we're segregating downtown from the rest of the city when we have the same problem throughout the city with vacant properties that are giving us the same type of grief." The council discussion included a staff explanation that the proposed registry targets structures rather than protected classes and that council authority permits geographically limited measures so long as they do not violate city, state or federal law.

A city staff member answered, "You're dealing with the structure itself, not necessarily the people," and added that carving out a district for enforcement is within the council's governing authority provided it does not conflict with ordinances or state or federal law. The staff member also noted that a fire-department chief would speak to public-safety concerns tied to the fire code.

Councilor Carroll pressed specifically on the penalty structure discussed in the draft, citing a figure spoken at the meeting that the fine range would move "from $2.50 to $4,000," and raised concern that properties already subject to Business Improvement District or Alliance assessments could face additional burdens. "It seems like you're forcing someone into a sale situation, unintendedly, where they can't own their property because we continue to put, taxes on top of that," Carroll said.

After discussion about scope, enforcement, and penalties, the council agreed to refer the draft ordinance to committee for further review. Councilor Carroll moved to send it to committee; no formal roll-call vote was recorded in the meeting transcript, and council members verbally agreed to the referral. Councilors discussed scheduling the committee review as early as next Tuesday, with one member noting a 1:00 p.m. availability.

The referral means the draft ordinance will return for additional review, where council members asked staff to clarify (1) whether the registry will be limited to downtown or expanded citywide, (2) the intended fine schedule and how fines would be applied to vacant properties already under BID or other assessments, and (3) public-safety justifications related to fire-code compliance. A fire-department representative was identified in the meeting as available to address code and safety issues during later review or committee consideration.

The council's action to send the ordinance to committee preserves several options: the council may expand the registry citywide, adjust fines, or target enforcement measures toward specific safety violations (for example, lack of required fire alarms) rather than vacancy alone.