Newport adopts ordinance clarifying building-maintenance rules and adds nuisance lighting standard

The Newport City Council on Feb. 18 adopted Ordinance No. 2,232, amending Chapter 8.1 of Title 8 of the Newport Municipal Code to clarify building- and property-maintenance standards and add a measurable nuisance-lighting provision.

The ordinance updates the city’s nuisance-abatement code to define building-maintenance issues — such as deteriorated siding, windows, roofs or decks — and gives code-enforcement staff a clearer standard for when to pursue voluntary compliance or enforcement. The measure also adds a nuisance-lighting threshold that can be measured at the property line, using the common illumination unit of foot-candles.

Derek Tokos, the city’s Community Development director, told the council the changes are intended to give code-enforcement and the police department “additional tools” to address properties that have fallen into disrepair before they become dangerous. “This is a set of tools for code enforcement,” Tokos said, adding the ordinance is meant to prioritize “more egregious examples” rather than minor cosmetic issues and to support voluntary compliance. Tokos also said the amendment references a 1-foot-candle threshold at the property line as a low-end, measurable standard that aligns with building-code lighting requirements for walkways.

Councilors asked for clarification on how the lighting standard would work in practice. Councilor Jacoby said she had “hoped that we would have something in place long before now about obnoxious lighting, spotlights in the yard that shine right onto somebody else’s bedroom,” and asked whether the ordinance would address lights that persist for years on deteriorated properties. Tokos answered that the new language should help with direct, measurable cases and said extreme cases can still require receivership or other actions when a property becomes hazardous.

Councilor Hall asked for clarification on whether the ordinance would stop the most extreme examples of long-term neglect. Tokos noted the city already has receivership tools but that they are used in the most hazardous, last-resort cases; the maintenance provisions are intended to help earlier, not to substitute for remedies when a building is materially unsafe.

Councilors also discussed whether the city should pursue a broader “dark sky” ordinance in the future to address fixture design, street and park lighting and other comprehensive standards. Tokos said a dark-sky package would be more involved and could be considered later; the nuisance-lighting language adopted now is narrower and intended to be a practical, measurable tool for complaints on private properties.

Council members asked about measurement and enforcement. Tokos said enforcement would typically rely on a foot-candle meter (a comparatively inexpensive handheld device) and that the 1-foot-candle threshold is low enough that many intrusive floodlights shining into a neighbor’s window would exceed it at the property line. The ordinance contains common carve-outs that exclude street lights, sports-field lighting and other public or institutional fixtures the council did not intend to regulate through this code change.

The council approved the ordinance by recorded voice vote after a motion to adopt. The ordinance’s language also references the city’s existing housing-repair partnerships, including a collaboration with DevNW, as a pathway for owners to obtain repair funding when they lack conventional lending options.