Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Chronic Nuisance Properties topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts 'chronic nuisance' ordinance to target repeat problem properties
Summary
The council adopted a new municipal code chapter 9.15 establishing procedures to declare properties chronic nuisances (3 incidents in 60 days or 7 in 12 months), allow written correction agreements and, as a last resort and after court proceedings, permit abatement up to demolition.
The Coeur d'Alene City Council voted June 16 to adopt a new chapter 9.15 of the municipal code intended to address properties used repeatedly for illegal activity or persistent nuisance behavior.
Chief Deputy City Attorney Ryan Hunter told the council the ordinance defines a chronic nuisance property as one with either three nuisance activities within 60 days or seven or more within 12 months and incorporates a layered due‑process procedure. The measure permits written correction agreements, administrative steps, and, only as a last resort and after court proceedings, demolition or other abatement when other efforts have failed.
Hunter said the language mirrors provisions already used in other jurisdictions and is intended for persistent situations where the property owner has not corrected unlawful activity at the site. "Demolition would be a last resort," he said, and only after extensive notice and a judicial finding.
Council debate focused on notice and property-owner protections. Councilmember Sheckler objected on record, calling the notice provisions inadequate and urging safe‑harbor language for landlords taking legal action. Several council members and the city attorney’s office said certified mail and additional publication could be added later if experience shows a need. Council members also discussed the difference between civil landlord‑tenant remedies (eviction) and the city's toolset for problems that continue despite landlord action.
Council approved the ordinance by roll call with one recorded dissent. Supporters said the ordinance fills a gap for repeat problem properties and gives police and the city more tools to protect neighborhoods; opponents urged stronger notice and landlord protections. The ordinance will be published and implemented through coordinated action by the police department, city attorney, and code‑enforcement staff.
City staff noted demolition and other abatement carry costs that may be recoverable from property sale but are expected to be used sparingly. Council members said they will monitor implementation and consider further amendments based on real‑world cases.
The vote recorded in the meeting minutes shows a majority in favor with a single dissenting vote; the ordinance is now part of the municipal code.
