Council approves overhaul of property-maintenance code after debate over ION safety-net exemptions

The Des Moines City Council approved a repeal-and-replace of Chapter 61 of the municipal code, which governs property maintenance and vacant properties, after councilmembers and staff debated tying enforcement to the city's ION program and changing appeal timelines.

Councilmember (speaker 5) urged the council to better link the new code to the ION safety-net program and to add specific exemptions for residents who have applied for ION but remain on a waiting list. "Part of why we've been talking about this so long is that we wanted to get the ION program in place as the safety net," the councilmember said, pressing for an exemption in section 61-6 for households on ION who are awaiting funding or repairs.

The councilmember also proposed lengthening the administrative hearing request period in section 61-18 from seven days to a longer interval, saying 30 days would be more appropriate for people to pursue an administrative appeal. "I think 30 days is, I think, the time to request a court hearing," the councilmember said, adding the extended time would give households more opportunity to seek help rather than face immediate enforcement.

City staff cautioned about an unintended loophole if the exemption were too broad. "If the waiting list for ION was a group of qualified, preapproved people we believe we have the capability of providing service in the next 24 months ' then I would be okay," a staff member (speaker 10) said, but warned that allowing anyone to apply for ION simply to avoid enforcement would undermine the ordinance: "What I wouldn't want to do is create a workaround of enforcement by everybody simply applying for ION."

The ordinance text discussed several specific code provisions by section number: proposed exemptions in 61-6; the administrative hearing timeline in 61-18; and a provision in 61-85 that would allow the city council to suspend or terminate the program. The councilmember asked that enforcement also be suspended along with any council action to suspend ION, so the enforcement mechanism would not outpace the intended safety net.

Councilmembers agreed on the policy intent and moved to approve the ordinance with direction to staff to draft amended language that reflected the council's concerns. The motion to advance the ordinance was moved and seconded; the council approved the measure and directed staff to return with revised wording to prevent misuse of the exemption while ensuring the most vulnerable residents have access to the ION safety net.

Next steps: staff will draft the clarifying language discussed on the record (exemption criteria for applicants already preapproved by ION, a longer administrative appeal period, and linkage between program suspension and enforcement) and return to the council for final confirmation of the ordinance language.