Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maumelle council authorizes condemnation proceedings for dilapidated house at 113 South Oakidge Cove
Summary
After residents reported long-standing blight and staff documented broken windows and other code violations, the Maumelle City Council voted to authorize the city attorney to seek condemnation of a property at 113 South Oakidge Cove; the owner faces a 30-day cure period and the city noted a recent foreclosure filing on the parcel.
The Maumelle City Council on June 2 authorized the city attorney to seek condemnation of a dilapidated structure at 113 South Oakidge Cove after staff described repeated code violations and a resident urged action to protect neighborhood safety and property values.
Scott Grummer, planning/permits staff for Maumelle, told the council that the property’s problems date to January 2024 and include broken windows and other signs of abandonment. "This property started out in January of 2024 with a code violation of a dilapidated structure," Grummer said, noting that staff had issued notices, pursued citations and taken the case to district court with no remedial response.
Resident Robert Tresb, who lives across the street, urged the council to act, describing a neighborhood left to "go to seed" and asking the city to "speak on my behalf." "If you put this house next to where any one of you all live, what would you do?" Tresb asked the council as he described how the property has damaged perceptions and upkeep in the block.
The city attorney recited the legal standard the council is applying: a nuisance exists where a building is "in such a dilapidated condition that it's unfit for human habitation" or poses health or fire hazards. If the council’s action proceeds, the owner will have a 30-day period to abate the condition; if not, the city may pursue repair or other remedies and seek to hold whoever then owns the parcel responsible.
Council members said they had received resident complaints and photographic evidence showing extensive exterior deterioration. Some members said the interior likely mirrors the exterior and that demolition might be necessary if the structure cannot be made habitable. Council Member Tierney said the building had "gone to seed" and may need to be torn down; other members urged prompt enforcement to prevent neighborhood decline.
Council Member Gardner moved to approve Resolution 2025-9 authorizing the city attorney to seek condemnation. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.
Staff also noted a recent legal development: two weeks before the meeting, a bank filed a foreclosure lawsuit on the parcel (a filing described in the packet as May 19), a point councilors discussed while asking how foreclosure might affect the condemnation process. Grummer said the city would pursue the party that holds title at the time enforcement is necessary, including mortgage lienholders if they become the record owner.
After the vote, the city attorney later informed the council that the landowner’s attorney had filed an appeal in circuit court and named the city and council members as defendants, alleging a civil-rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The attorney said the municipal league may be asked to assist with defense.
Next steps: the condemned owner will be given the statutory cure period to abate or repair; staff will proceed with the actions authorized by the council and report back on enforcement and any litigation developments.
