Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing And Blight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council discusses clearance grant, demolition plans and options for adjudicated properties
Summary
City staff said a clearance grant bid process begins immediately for about 15 properties and that an additional ~25 properties are slated for demolition; staff reported more than 60 adjudicated properties since 2019 and discussed a next-door neighbor/dollar buyback program administered by E & P Consulting and statutory limits on donating city-owned property.
City staff and council members on June 8 held an extended discussion about a clearance grant to remove blighted properties and the city’s handling of adjudicated properties.
Shantrelle Rock told the council the clearance grant bid process would begin the next day and would cover roughly 15 properties. She said the city has an additional list of about 25 properties intended for demolition and clearance beyond the grant-funded group. ‘‘This is the list that would have been next on our list had the grant not come about,’’ Rock said, describing the city’s multi-year list of condemned or previously handled parcels.
Council members and staff described the selection process: properties are added to a condemnation report, owners are notified and staff attempts owner engagement before adjudication. Rock said that since 2019 the city has more than 60 adjudicated properties it must maintain unless owners redeem them.
The council discussed options for transferring or selling adjudicated parcels. City staff identified a program offered by E & P Consulting—called a ‘‘next-door neighbor’’ or dollar-buyback program—that allows neighbors who have maintained adjacent lots to purchase them under certain city policies. Staff and the city attorney emphasized statutory constraints: when a parcel is owned by the city through adjudication, state law and city ordinances generally require fair-market-value sale unless the transfer can be justified as a city benefit or conducted under a nonprofit-donation process governed by ordinance.
Council members raised questions about lot-size rules, the difficulty smaller lots pose for future development and the need to consider zoning variances or code adjustments to facilitate sales and redevelopment. Staff said the city might pursue policy changes or workshops to clarify processes and that sale terms (appraised market value versus nominal-dollar programs) would require council approval.
Next steps recorded in the meeting: staff will proceed with the clearance-grant bid process, pursue demolition/clearance on the named list, and return to council with progress reports and recommended policies for managing adjudicated properties, including options for the neighbor-program or other disposition mechanisms.
Quotations in this article are verbatim from meeting remarks as recorded in the council transcript; legal and procedural constraints described reflect statements by city staff and council members during the discussion.
