In July 2024, the Nowak Metro Finance Lab at Drexel University and Accelerator for America launched the National Housing Crisis Task Force (link).

The Task Force was created to tackle “the breadth and depth of the housing crisis and the urgent need for all layers of government and the private and civic sectors to rise to the occasion and fully treat the housing crisis like the crisis it is.”

In March 2025 they released “The introduction to the State and Local Housing Action Plan” (link) summarizing all of the expected tools planned and includes a “how to” guide for the action plan.

In May 2025 they released a second set of tools being added to its State and Local Housing Action Plan (link)

Following are the listing of the announced tools: (Each item is hyperlinked to additional details)

March 2025

May 2025

A recent article from CBS News Miami (link) highlighted a challenging situation, where an elderly couple in their 80s is facing over $366,000 in fines related to code violations on their duplex.

To be fair, it’s entirely possible the article doesn’t tell the full story. There may be additional context — perhaps the property owners are habitual offenders, or the violations were more severe than described. Municipal enforcement is rarely black and white.

That said, the overall optics of this case are concerning. Regardless of any missing context, this situation has created a narrative that reflects poorly on the city — and that’s something most municipalities would want to avoid.

There are a few important lessons worth reflecting on:

1. Communication Matters — Even When It’s Limited

During a public meeting, city commissioners were informed of the case by a reporter. Their decision not to respond may have been due to the issue being in active litigation — a perfectly valid reason to withhold comment. That said, even a brief explanation such as “We’re unable to discuss ongoing legal matters at this time” would have signaled to the public that the matter is being taken seriously and not ignored.

In sensitive cases, communication — even when limited — helps build public trust.

2. Delays and Discretion: A Need for Flexibility
The more substantial concern involves the timeline and the fine structure itself.

According to the article, the homeowners believe they addressed the violations promptly. Yet it reportedly took more than 220 days for the city to return and verify compliance. Perhaps there was a breakdown in communication — maybe the city was never notified that the work was completed. Still, such a long delay raises questions about the system’s efficiency and responsiveness to timely resolutions.

What really stands out, however, is what happened after compliance. Once the property was brought up to code, there doesn’t appear to have been a clear, accessible path to drastically reduce or rescind the fines. While every city needs safeguards to ensure fairness and prevent abuse, there must also be room for discretion — especially when dealing with long-time residents and unique circumstances.

To an outsider, this situation called for a “slap on the wrist” penalty, not a “$366,000 sledgehammer.”

Moving Forward

Again, there may be more to this case than what has been publicly reported — and perhaps that additional context would help explain how things escalated. But from a public policy perspective, it’s hard not to conclude that this situation could have — and should have — been handled differently.

To be fair, many code enforcement departments are operating with limited resources. Staffing shortages, increasing caseloads, and budget constraints all impact the speed and consistency of enforcement activities. It’s entirely possible that delays or missed opportunities in this case were not due to neglect, but to overburdened staff doing their best under pressure. Code enforcement officials are deeply dedicated public servants who want what’s best for the community as a whole — and for its residents in particular. But without the proper support and flexibility in the system, even well-intentioned efforts can produce unfortunate outcomes.

A more flexible and transparent code enforcement process could have saved the city time, money, and the damage of negative media exposure.

Code enforcement is a vital municipal function, but it works best when it’s seen as fair, efficient, and responsive to the people it serves. Everyone benefits when systems are designed to resolve issues quickly and equitably.

No system is perfect, and enforcement is rarely simple. But cases like this are reminders of the human impact behind these processes. With thoughtful updates to policy — and a bit more flexibility and communication — similar situations can often be resolved with less stress, less cost, and greater community goodwill.

Ideally, we should all be working toward systems that uphold standards while also supporting the people who live in our neighborhoods.

Often overlooked, abandoned boats are visible blight and potential safety hazards.

Pennsylvania State Rep. Anita Kulik, chair of the House Game and Fisheries Committee, introduced H.B. 103 “providing for at-risk, derelict and abandoned boats; and imposing penalties.”
The bill has passed the House and now moves to the Senate.

To view the text of the proposed legislation, please click here.
To view Rep. Kulik’s press release, please click here.
To view a related media article, please click here.

A new report by Housing Action Illinois and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Code Enforcement as a Tool for Safe, Equitable & Affordable Housing, explores the impact of local housing code enforcement on health, safety, and stability.

The study analyzed housing code enforcement practices in five midsize Illinois cities and Chicago, exploring challenges in current enforcement models and identifying opportunities for reform.

Key findings

Recommendations

To view the full report, please click here

To view a summary article from the Urban Institute, please click here.