Council discusses code-enforcement contract, notices and complaint tracking

Councilmembers heard a detailed presentation from Adam Coyle about next steps for a contracted code-enforcement program, including model violation notices, due-process timelines and a digital complaint-tracking system.

Coyle explained the intended workflow: an initial friendly notice followed by a formal notice of violation if the property does not come into compliance, a 10‑day window for a written hearing request and clear notice language describing corrective actions and potential municipal-infraction consequences. He said he will log complaints and photos in a shared Google Doc so staff and council can follow cases and that he will wear identifying gear while conducting inspections.

"I would recommend in the future making that change for chapter 155.11 number three," Coyle said, referring to aligning local code language with the city’s nuisance and IPMC references while maintaining the more restrictive local standard. Council members asked for clarity on hearing timelines and for the resolution that lists contracted officers to be added to a future agenda so the appointment appears in official records.

Council discussion covered prioritization (junk vehicles and long-term noncompliance were cited as common complaints), how notices and hearings will be scheduled, and whether staff should post a public notice about the new enforcement program on the website and utility bills. No vote was taken to adopt the resolution at this meeting; the mayor and staff agreed to place the item on a future agenda for formal action.