Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Wednesday, January 26, 2000 Page: 10A
WE THANK YOU for your new “Eyesore Norm” column that draws attention to
long-derelict properties and structures in the area. Property maintenance code
enforcement is one of the best ways to preserve the qualities of a community
and also to reinvigorate a town suffering from problems.
However, it is not always so easy to do something about such properties.
Before anything can be done the local town council has to adopt a property
maintenance ordinance and appoint a code enforcement officer and/or building
inspector to enforce it.
Many of our towns do not have a current property maintenance ordinance in
effect nor can they afford to hire an inspector or enforcement officer to
spend time on researching problem properties in addition to their duties of
issuing permits and inspecting new construction.
The first step in the process is to determine ownership of the problem
property through a title search and to issue a legal notice of the code
violations, providing a time period for correction, notice of penalties for
noncompliance, and a right of appeal.
Unfortunately, often an owner cannot be easily located to be served or the
property is part of an estate with many potential owners who cannot be located
or are not interested in the property – not to mention that the property may
have unpaid property taxes and/or liens against it which can cloud ownership
and further complicate the issue.
Assuming that notice is served and that the corrections aren’t undertaken,
the next step is for the enforcement offi cer to issue a citation to the
property owner for each violation. Again, notice becomes a problem. If the
owner cannot be located to be served in person with the citation, it must be
done through the mail, and if the mail attempt is unsuccessful, further time
elapses while an arrest warrant is issued by the local district justice. Then
even more time can elapse while the local police department or constable
serves the arrest warrant if they can locate the property owner.
Even assuming that a hearing is held and the defendant is found guilty, all
that emerges is a fine – often $300-$500 which may or may not be paid. Our
court system allows for payment plans for fines which can drag on for months
or even years. More citations and more hearings elicit the same response, and
then the owner complains that they are paying all of their disposable income
in fines and have no money to repair the derelict properties.
There is also the problem of an elderly owner on a fixed income and/or an
owner who is simply poor. Often these people want to repair their properties
but simply cannot afford to do so. No one wants to fine an old person living
alone in their home of 50 years or chase a struggling young family onto the
streets. In these cases, judgment and patience are needed.
There are grants and low-interest loans and rehabilitation programs out
there that can be of assistance to many of these people, but often it can take
a long time to get the process underway.
Under certain conditions – most often, irreparable structural failure or
decay or severe unsanitary conditions a structure can be ordered to be
demolished by the local building inspector or code enforcement officer. Again
the problem of serving notice of this order to all the owners comes into play.
Fortunately here in Luzerne County the Luzerne County Office of Community
Development offers a demo lition grant program that pays for demolishing
derelict structures. However, certain conditions apply: The property owner
must agree, property taxes must be paid to date, and the property usually must
be free of liens or other encumbrances.
Additionally, a five-year lien for the cost of the demolition is placed on
the property. If the local government has the administrative ability to
procure these grants and if the property owner agrees, demolition grants are
an easy way to clear problem properties. In Edwardsville, since 1996 we have
obtained over $50,000 in demolition grant funds, allowing for the razing of
over a half-dozen hopelessly decayed structures.
It is true that, even without the owner’s approval, under certain
conditions a local government can still have a problem structure demolished.
But there is the expense of the court action needed to get the approvals. And
the great detriment is that the local government is responsible for the demo
lition costs. Few of our small towns can afford to spend $10,000 to tear down
a derelict structure with no real hope of ever recovering the costs.
The bottom line is that “doing something” about these problem properties
is far more complicated than it might appear, and unfortunately due to the
cost and complexity, many small town governments find it a tough go. But that
does not mean the effort is impossible or should not be made.
In Edwardsville, working with only a part-time building inspector and code
enforcement officer on an extremely limited budget – but with the full support
of the Borough Council – we have already done something about many problem
properties that plagued the town for years. If residents would express support
for such endeavors to the governing bodies of their towns, similar results are
possible everywhere.
David Allen Hines, a former Kingston Councilman, is the code enforcement
officer and borough manager of Edwardsville.
Henry E. O’Dell served for 20 years as an inspector in Washington, D.C. and
14 years as building inspector of Larksville Borough before becoming
Edwardsville’s building inspector in 1996.