Residents urge action on neglected yards, parking and barking; council points to nuisance ordinances and compliance officer

Residents at the Rexburg City Council meeting on Aug. 29 urged the city to address what they described as persistent property-maintenance problems in older neighborhoods east of the university, saying weeds, neglected yards, multiple-occupancy rentals and chronic dog barking are harming property values and public safety.

Gerald Griffin, who said he lives in the Sorensen addition east of the university, told the council he has noticed a growing number of homes bought as rentals that are not being maintained and described “incessant dog barking” that sometimes runs into the evening. “Do we have a compliance officer, and do we have ordinances in place? That’s my question,” Griffin asked at the meeting.

Council President Mike Walker and other councilors replied that the city does have nuisance ordinances and a compliance officer. The mayor directed residents to contact City Hall’s front desk to be connected to the compliance officer and named the staff member: “She is our compliance officer…Natalie.” Walker said that noxious weeds are covered by state law and noted that overgrown weeds can become a fire hazard.

Resident Karen Webster, who said she has lived at 309 Yale Avenue for decades, described multiple houses converted to long-term rental units that she said are producing heavy curbside parking and trash. “When someone buys these houses, do they have to come in and ask what the deal is to live in Rexburg?” she asked. City staff answered that long-term rentals are allowed in LDR-1 and LDR-2 zoning (low-density residential) and that short-term rentals (less than 30 days) are regulated separately.

Council members and staff outlined enforcement and reporting options rather than new immediate regulation. The mayor and other councilors encouraged residents to call the front desk or dispatch police for nuisance barking, to submit specific property addresses to the compliance officer for investigation, and to provide lists of problem properties. One councilor asked residents to give those addresses to city staff member Deborah so compliance staff could follow up.

On the barking issue councilors said the police department has been responsive: officers will listen outside a property and, if the barking continues, they will visit the owner’s door. For vehicles, councilors noted existing ordinances restricting extended street parking (typically measured in 48-hour periods) and restrictions on oversized vehicles or semi-trucks parked long-term on residential streets.

Council members said they will consider a small driving tour of the neighborhoods cited by speakers so councilors can see problem areas firsthand, and they discussed whether the city should revisit development-code updates that were in progress (councilors noted a proposed cap on occupancy was discussed during recent development-code work but had not yet been adopted).

The council did not adopt any new ordinance or take a formal vote at the meeting. Instead, staff were directed to receive the addresses residents submit, have the compliance officer investigate, and coordinate with police for barking complaints. Councilors said they would consider further discussion of “minimum maintenance” standards after gathering on-the-ground information.

Community members who want a compliance response were told to call City Hall’s front desk to be connected to the compliance officer; for barking that is ongoing and disruptive they were told the police department can respond.

Ending: The council thanked the speakers for their long-term community involvement, invited additional written submissions of problem addresses for the compliance officer to review, and said councilors would follow up after the staff review and any site visits.