Ely council authorizes process to seize long‑condemned Crawford Street property

The Ely City Council voted unanimously May 22 to authorize the city to begin legal proceedings to seize 2160 Crawford Street, a property the city condemned in April 2024 after years of fire damage and repeated noncompliance with repair and cleanup notices. Building Official Don Hendrickson told the council the structure was fire‑damaged in 2013 and, despite repeated notices since 2021, property owners did not complete required remediation after the April 15, 2024 condemnation order.

Hendrickson described the site as a public safety and nuisance concern: "the structure is falling in due to the building being burnt and fire ridden," and after repeated attempts the city had to consider more decisive action. City Attorney Chris Arabia framed the council vote as the first step in a multi‑step legal process, saying the motion to pursue seizure was "step one" and that further legal actions, hearings and potential court processes would follow.

Neighbors and family members of the owner contested the action during public comment. Danny Ortega, who said he was representing family interests, cautioned the council on constitutional protections and statutory procedures if seizure proceeded: "If the City Council is going to vote on seizure they would be in violation of the Nevada Constitution, and NRS 37.11, and you would have to fairly compensate Mr. Bida before the seizure takes place," he said, urging that due process and court review be observed. Other neighbors described ongoing debris and trespassing at the site and urged decisive cleanup.

Hendrickson outlined the city's intent if seizure proceeds: secure and demolish the hazardous structure, abate related nuisances, then offer the cleaned parcel for disposition, which could include auction; prior owners would retain the right to participate in any resale process. The building official said the condemnation order gave the property owner 60 days to present a remediation plan or effect repairs, a timeline that had lapsed without an enforceable plan.

The council's action authorizes initiation of the legal steps needed to transfer possession to the city for abatement; it does not itself order immediate demolition or sale. Council members said the step was prompted by repeated unsuccessful efforts to compel timely remediation over several years and by ongoing safety concerns. The motion carried unanimously.

What happens next: city staff will proceed with the legal process outlined by the city attorney and building department, which may include court filings, appraisal and just‑compensation procedures. Opponents and the property owner may pursue judicial review, and the city acknowledged that further procedural steps will determine timing and outcome.

The council did not specify a demolition date; the action authorizes initiation of eminent‑domain and abatement processes and is the opening step in what the city described as a multi‑stage legal path.