Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Tinley Park officials over hoarding, 15 dogs and code enforcement limits
Summary
At the Nov. 18 meeting residents described neighbor hoarding, rodent infestations and roughly 15 dogs that attacked property; staff described ticketing, possible liens, county involvement and adult protective services as next steps and agreed to follow up with the complainants.
Several Tinley Park residents used the public-comment period at the Nov. 18 Village Board meeting to press officials about severe neighborhood conditions they say are harming safety and quality of life.
Cody McElhaney introduced himself as a resident on Elm Lane Drive and told trustees he and his wife were "here tonight to just raise some questions" about enforcement after their neighbor kept "15 dogs" that have attacked his property and created a persistent garbage and rodent problem. "15 dogs is a bit excessive," McElhaney said, adding that the yard is "a landfill" and that feces and smell had spread to his property. He said he and his wife paid about $4,000 to protect their property and that code enforcement told them there was insufficient proof to act.
Village staff and the village attorney described the enforcement path: officers and code enforcement can issue citations but state law and county processes limit some local actions; unpaid fines can lead to liens recorded with the Cook County Clerk's Office, and if a property is found uninhabitable there are additional recourses that require access and formal findings. Staff identified Code Enforcement Officer Steve Cherino as assigned to the location and said they would follow up with the complainants. The attorney also noted the Illinois Department on Aging adult-protective-services hotline for suspected elder abuse, saying it is available 24 hours.
The board repeatedly stressed that staff had been to the property, that citations had been written in some cases and that further action depends on county processes and court enforcement. Tiffany, the village attorney, said she would research ordinance options and work with staff to determine whether existing rules about litters or breeders warrant revision.
The board requested contact details and asked the complainant to meet with staff after the meeting so the village could gather documentation and pursue next steps. No formal board action (such as a citation schedule change or ordinance amendment) was taken at the Nov. 18 meeting; staff committed to follow up with the residents.
