One Georgia municipality is working to develop “a civil nuisance law that would allow private citizens to file nuisance complaints in Municipal Court.”
The stated intent is to assist in scenarios where a violation exists that code enforcement does not have access to or to avoid the weaponization of code enforcement.

To view the article please click here.

For additional information this topic please click on the following links:

 

 

 

Two states are seeing contrasting efforts pertaining to rental property registries.

In Kentucky, House Bill 173, introduced by Rep. Ryan Dotson, R-Winchester, would prohibit any local government in Kentucky from adopting or enforcing “policy that creates or maintains a registry of landlords or residential rental properties for any purpose.”

While in Georgia, the Georgia Municipal Association is advocating for lawmakers to overturn their state’s ban on rental registries

Even on the local level, all is not smooth sailing, while one Ohio community is touting their new rental registry (click here) another is dealing with the ramifications of last month’s Tuscarawas County Common Pleas Court ruling striking down it’s landlord registration deeming the yearly, per-unit fee unconstitutional (click here)

For more information on the two state bills, please click on the following links:

Kentucky: Louisville’s childhood lead exposure protections would be gutted under new state proposal

Georgia: This legislative session, another push to remove Georgia’s ban on rental registries

Recent reports from the Wall Street Journal and other major outlets have highlighted a concerning trend: in some housing markets, homeowners are now paying more for insurance and property taxes than they are for their mortgages.

A July 2024 article from Realtor.com cautioned, “Soaring Costs of Insurance and Property Taxes Are the Top Risks for Triggering Mortgage Delinquencies.” This shift in financial burdens is making it clear that taxes and insurance—once secondary costs—are now a major concern for homeowners.

While a September 2024 headline from Zillow suggests that mortgage payments in some areas are now lower than rent in 22 of the 50 largest U.S. metros, this can be misleading. Zillow’s article points out that cities like New Orleans, Chicago, and Pittsburgh offer the greatest savings on mortgage payments compared to rent, but it overlooks the crucial costs of taxes and insurance, which are rising rapidly.

If Realtor.com’s warning is accurate, these rising “hidden costs” will trigger mortgage delinquencies, resulting in foreclosure and property abandonment.

As foreclosures increase, municipalities face the challenge of dealing with vacant properties. This is where MuniReg comes in.

MuniReg works directly with municipalities to track vacant and foreclosed properties through our no-cost specialized registry programs. Additionally, we help local governments navigate the complex process of returning them to productive use.

With MuniReg’s expertise, municipalities can better manageany rise in foreclosures, turning potential liabilities into valuable assets for the community.

Contact us today to learn how MuniReg can assist your municipality in managing vacant and foreclosed properties, ensuring they are returned to productive use and contribute to local growth.

To view the referenced articles please click on the following links:
MSN: Homeowners are paying more for insurance and taxes than their mortgages, study shows
Realtor.com: Soaring Cost of Insurance and Property Tax Is the Top Risk for Triggering Mortgage Delinquencies, Survey Finds
Zillow: Mortgage payments fall lower than rent in 22 of the 50 largest US metros

In the last post, we delved into an instance of “When Systems Fail.” Unfortunately, another case has surfaced, bringing with it numerous red flags and critical questions to consider. Where to even begin?

This time, a staggering fine of $1,097,400 had accumulated over more than a decade—all for what were described as “minor infractions.” Yet, the situation raises serious concerns:

Then there’s the glaring issue of optics. When the file was eventually “found,” no one thought twice about mailing this decade-old bill for “minor infractions”? Even sending it to the original owner raises questions about judgment.

This case isn’t an isolated misstep. Florida has seen its share of similar controversies:

What lessons were learned from these cases? Judging by the city’s initial action of mailing the letter and its initial response—advising the homeowner to negotiate with the collection agency—it seems like very few.

As with the previous example I discussed, I truly hope (believe?) these are the exceptions to the rule, yet still why hasn’t anyone, either within the system or externally, stepped up to say: “Enough!”

This isn’t just about efficiency —it’s about accountability, fairness, and common sense.

The quote often misattributed to Albert Einstein, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” feels particularly relevant to a recent article coming out of Pittsburgh.

In this troubling piece, one detail stands out — and yet seems largely overlooked:

“At the home on Webster Avenue, inspectors returned to the property 44 times after their first visit — nearly once a month — flagging the same violation again and again.”

Let’s pause for a moment. What exactly is happening here? The property owner is “the city,” and the inspector is also “the city.”

This means the city is effectively spending time, money, and resources revisiting the same abandoned property over and over, only to repeatedly document violations that remain unaddressed. But property damage or code violations will not magically disappear. And when action is taken, it would logically be the city correcting its own violations. So why are inspectors being sent back again and again with no resolution?

If this repeated inspection process were designed to track the speed of a property’s deterioration to prioritize demolitions or other interventions, it might make sense. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be the case.

Instead, this behavior highlights an example of “checking the boxes” — mechanically following procedure without any regard for the bigger picture.

At its core, this potentially reveals a deeper, systemic issue. When 5, 10 or 44 inspections result in no meaningful action, one has to ask: Is this the exception or the rule? And why hasn’t anyone, internally or externally, stopped to shout: “Enough!”

I truly hope (believe?) that this is an exception and not the rule, yet in these instances the cycle must be broken. Whether through better oversight and/or reformed processes, municipalities cannot afford to waste time and resources on endless, repetitive and unnecessary tasks. It’s time to focus on solutions — not just procedures.