Battling Blight City officials tackle dilapidated buildings - by Erin Schattauer

Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.

------------------------

When I first read this I thought of armed patrols moving through neighborhoods to ensure compliance. Of course that is the extreme manifestation of what happens when government starts deploying code enforcement officers. Nevertheless, we are talking about degrees here. If the City can implement its enforcement capability on dilapidated structures, is there any enumerated limit to its enforcement capability regarding other municipal code violators? 

Yeah, I know, it's crazy talk. It's never happened in history. There are no cities in the U.S. that force people to separate their recyclables, tell people they can't hold Bible studies in their houses, force children to stop selling lemonade, or close down charitable food kitchens. No, that stuff never happens.

--------------------------------

The white paint started peeling away years ago. Graffiti started showing up. And police have seen signs of transients and squatters on more than one occasion.

For the big white house at 305 W. Peach St., these are just a few of the signs that the home hasn’t been cared for in years.

City documents state that on 11 separate occasions between August 2008 and June 2012, city zoning officers, Bozeman police and the city’s historic preservation officer contacted the property management company, the owner and bank officials about the house.

Eventually, the city building department paid $1,600 to board up the house.

The city is taking steps to deal with neglected buildings, whether it’s an abandoned home or a historic structure that has been left to rot.

Crafting a demolition by neglect ordinance is on the City Commission’s to-do list for 2013-2014. (So if you ignore the City long enough regarding your well-worn tool shed, they will at some point come in and tear it down. They will COME ON TO YOUR PROPERTY and destroy a non-complying building!)

In October, city staff presented findings to the commission and recommended it allows new programs and existing codes to address dilapidated, nuisance and unsafe structures in the city.

A building fits under the city’s definition for demolition by neglect if it is “unsecured, not weather tight and attracts nuisance behavior.”

“We don’t go out and actively ensure that buildings aren’t being neglected,” historic preservation officer Courtney Kramer said. (Whew, that's a relief. Um, wait. Do they not do this because they can't by law, or because they just don't have the staff? Would they go out and do this if they could?)

Calls about neglected buildings and properties usually come from neighbors or other residents.

“Most of our complaints are all called in by the public. It’s a very reactive position, which means (city staff members) are not going out there looking for it, they’re responding to complaints,” Bozeman Police Capt. Mark Johnson said. (The second time this point has been made. Are they trying to reassure us of something?)

One piece of the puzzle in addressing demolition by neglect was hiring a quality of life officer. (Actually, Code Compliance Officer. Or at least I think so. There is no mention of a "quality of life officer" in the Municipal code. This language is found in the building permits and building codes section of the Municipal Code:

Sec. 38.34.160. Violation; penalty; assisting or abetting; additional remedies.
The effective enforcement of adopted standards is necessary to accomplish their intended purpose. The city has a variety of options for the enforcement of this chapter. The planning director shall select the option which in their opinion is most suitable to the circumstance and violation. More than one enforcement option may be used to attain compliance with the standards of this chapter when deemed appropriate.
A.
Violation of the provisions of this chapter or failure to comply with any of its requirements including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with the grant of variances or conditional uses or any of the required conditions imposed by the review authority shall constitute a misdemeanor. Any person who violates this chapter or fails to comply with any of its requirements shall upon conviction thereof be fined or imprisoned or both, either as set forth in state law regarding subdivision and zoning, or in accordance with 1.01.210, and in addition shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the case except as stated in subsection D of this section.
1.
Each day such violation continues shall be considered a separate offense and punishable as such.
2.
For violations relating to plats each sale, lease or transfer of each separate parcel of land in violation of any provision of these regulations or the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act shall be deemed a separate and distinct offense.
B.
The code compliance officer is authorized to issue a notice to appear under the provisions of MCA 46-6-310 to any violator of this chapter.
C.
The owner or tenant of any building, structure, premises or part thereof, and any architect, builder, contractor, agent or other person who commits, participates in, assists or maintains such violation may each be found guilty of a separate offense and suffer the penalties herein provided.
D.
If transfers not in accordance with these regulations or the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act are made, the city attorney shall commence action to enjoin further sales or transfers and compel compliance with all provisions of these regulations. The cost of the action must be imposed against the party not prevailing.
E.
When a violation has not been corrected by the property owner after written notice from the city, the enforcement officer or planning director may seek approval for filing at the county clerk and recorder's office a notice of violation or noncompliance. Such notice shall serve to advise potential purchasers of existing violations of this chapter or of on-going enforcement actions regarding a property. Such notice shall clearly state that the parcel or development on the parcel is in violation of this chapter and that correction of the violation must be made prior to the city approving additional development or redevelopment of the site. The notice shall also describe the nature of the violation and applicable citations to the relevant sections of this chapter.
1.
When such a notice is to be filed the enforcement officer shall either:
a.
Through the office of the city attorney bring an action for civil and/or injunctive relief that requests a court order to record a notice of violation or noncompliance; or
b.
Schedule a public meeting to be held before the city commission with the intention of receiving an order from the city commission confirming the validity of the violation and the need for correction, and authorizing the recording of the notice of violation or noncompliance. Notice of such a hearing shall be provided as required by article 40 of this chapter.
2.
When a violation has been corrected for which a notice of violation or noncompliance was filed, the city shall record a release of noncompliance indicating that the prior violation has been corrected. The property owner is responsible for notifying the planning department in writing of the correction of the violation or noncompliance. Upon receipt of such notification by the property owner, the enforcement officer shall conduct an inspection to verify correction prior to the recording of the release.
F.
The city may maintain an action or proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction to compel compliance with or to restrain by injunction the violation of, any provision of this chapter.
G.
Violation of this chapter is a municipal infraction and may be punishable by a civil penalty as provided in section 24.02.040, in addition to other remedies of this section except that the court shall impose the following minimum civil penalties.
1.
Each day such violation continues shall be considered a separate offense and punishable as such. The minimum civil penalty for violation of this chapter by the same person for the same violation within a 12-month period shall be:
a.
First citation: $100.00.
b.
Second citation: $150.00.
c.
Third and subsequent citations: $200.00.
d.
The determining factor with respect to the civil penalty is the receipt of service of the citation and not the judgment.
H.
Nothing herein contained shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
I.
Upon resolution of an identified instance of noncompliance with the standards of this chapter the city may record a document with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder to give notice of the resolution of the noncompliance.
(Ord. No. 1645, § 18.64.160, 8-15-2005; Ord. No. 1693, § 23(18.64.160), 2-20-2007; Ord. No. 1761, exh. M(18.64.160), 7-6-2009; Ord. No. 1804, § 13, 7-11-2011; Ord. No. 1828, § 101, 9-10-2012)

The position was filled in July, but the first person that held the job has since left.

Another person was recently hired. Mark Carpenter has been on the job for a few weeks.

The quality of life officer, or code enforcement officer, (This Orwellian name is so much gentler sounding. However, if you search for "quality of life officer" you will not find one. Same with "Code enforcement officer.") as the police department refers to it, is a non-sworn civilian officer who responds to calls, addresses quality of life issues and can issue citations.

The city is streamlining the process to report complaints. The police department is working to get a number specifically for people to call in complaints. Right now, callers sometimes get passed around to different departments when they call in a complaint, Johnson said. “So we can have kind of a one-stop shop where people can call with their complaints and Mark (Carpenter) will know how to handle them or what department handles it,” he said.

Johnson cites the West Peach Street house as one of the properties that the city has worked to address.

“We just worked with the bank that owned the property…and got them to make it safe,” he said of getting the house boarded up.

He also cited a dilapidated garage on the south side of town that was falling down with its roof caved in.

“I was aware of the structure falling down. It was a quality of life issue. (This must be the buzz phrase de jour. Government loves those innocuous sounding euphemisms.)  It looked bad to neighbors walking by. It was a safety hazard, too,” he said.

The owner was contacted and within a week’s time the garage was torn down, he said.

The city also worked with owners when they received reports of children trespassing at the old Story Mill.

“That’s kind of how our role is, to problem solve and work with owners,” Johnson said.

Moving forward, city staff made four recommendations to the City Commission:

Educate residents about the risk factors for neglect, the nuisance codes and how the quality of life officer will act as a point of contact (A little indoctrination never hurt anyone.)

Share information with the quality of life officer, neighborhood groups and nonprofits regarding available resources (Share. How generous. They just want to "share" information, so as to "educate" us.)

Give these initiatives time to develop before evaluating effectiveness, and reevaluate in 18 months

Continue to use the quality of life officer as the point of contact for neglected properties and give the officer time to get up and running

At this point, the initiative focuses mainly on evaluating the city’s existing tools and making them more effective. (Ahhh. There we have it. "At this point" means that this is what they will do for now, but more is coming. What that "more" might be is anyone's guess, but you can be sure that "sharing" will morph into "requiring.")

Kramer said a lot can be done to proactively tackle the problem by providing people with information about available resources.

Erin Schattauer can be reached at 582-2628 or eschattauer@dailychronicle.com.