In a recent article (click here), a local TV station in Cincinnati discusses a Councilmember’s new initiative to have unpaid code enforcement fines no longer be applied to the property’s taxes.

While the Councilmember’s intentions are very honorable and worthwhile, it is not only the struggling homeowner whose rights and circumstances need to protected. I have always advocated that just as a homeowner has certain rights, so too the neighboring property owners have rights.

Striking a balance is extremely difficult. Often it takes specific training, skill and experience to achieve success. Sometimes it’s discretion and common sense. But increasingly these instances require “micromanagement” and municipal staff often do not have the bandwidth to do what is needed.

There are many instances of code violation fines being ignored and the municipality unable to escalate (i.e. take legal actions)

There are many instances where code violations fines are placed as liens, that may be “wiped out” at foreclosure sale as they would be secondary lien to the mortgage. If the funds are recouped at sale how much time has passed?

Code enforcement should have as many “carrots” and “sticks” at their disposal to effectively fulfill their responsibilities to their community. Removing a big “stick” would greatly weaken a critical component to the ongoing health of a community.

There are “carrots” not being utilized. Communities should continue to innovate, think creatively, and think out-of-the-box to increase the bandwidth of their code enforcement team to allow for the micromanagement.

This will create a win-win solution for property owners and municipalities.

7.13.2021 A recent article in the Baltimore Sun/Washington Post article provides further insight into the new program

For more information, please click here.

5.26.2021 Following up the below September 2020 report, the City of Baltimore has implemented their new program. However, it doesn’t come without critics.

For more information please click here.

-In two recently published articles we find contrasting approaches two large cities are taking regarding making the owner information to the general public. Baltimore, that is taking the approach of being more transparent intends to utilize a new method of tracking properties – QR Codes.

Baltimore: Under new legislation, each of Baltimore’s vacants could soon have its own sign — and QR code

Philadelphia: Why Philly residents are mad you can’t search city property owners by name anymore

Authored by Payton A. Heins, Associate Director of Michigan Initiatives and Matt Kreis, General Counsel, this new resource “breaks down nine leading code enforcement tools that help fight vacancy through traditional enforcement, proactive regulation, and additional strategies. The guide offers residents, enforcement professionals and leaders a robust resource for understanding the tools and impacts of code enforcement on the lives of residents, local budgets, and infrastructure.”

***One of the many tools listed is a vacant property registry and a rental property registry.

The “Disadvantages” section states:

“A VPRO as a data collection and management tool is only as useful as the information put into it. Compliance rates for most VPROs are often not very high — in fact, some communities would consider a compliance rate of 50 percent high. Out-of-state or deceased owners are unlikely to register, for example, and it may be that these unregistered buildings are the ones imposing the most harm on the community. In addition, enforcing the VPRO, which includes sending out registration notices and monitoring and tracking the status of both registered and unregistered properties, may take a significant amount of resources and thus may not be the most efficient use of limited local capacity”.

This is exactly why MuniReg exists. To allow a municipality to have this tool in its toolbox maximizing compliance and internal efficiencies, and eliminating the “Disadvantages”.

For access to the Report, please click here.