Can Detroit Do This? Beef Up Property Compliace Codes/Penalties

[sumas]

Not defending banks but must say that foreclosure homes have been maintained, grass, snow, etc. in EEV.

Speculators have been less responsible. EEV has an Emma home policy, which means near neighbors maintain vacant homes.

It gets tiresome sometimes removing circulars, mowing grass, removing snow from homes bought for speculation purposes.

One would assume [[ apparently wrongly) that an investment should be protected and gasp even improved.

[ndavies]

Yes another brilliant Idea. Let's burden the citizens and businesses of Detroit with another fee, another tax and another disincentive to stay. More taxes and more regulations are not going to fix the city. Stop trying to penalize everyone and continuing to drive them out to the exurbs.

This is just another continuation of the policies that have driven businesses and individuals out to the the bordering greenfields. All places where the zoning regulations are not as stringent and taxes are easier to live with.

[laurin]

Yes another brilliant Idea. Let's burden the citizens and businesses of Detroit with another fee, another tax and another disincentive to stay. More taxes and more regulations are not going to fix the city. Stop trying to penalize everyone and continuing to drive them out to the exurbs.

This is just another continuation of the policies that have driven businesses and individuals out to the the bordering greenfields. All places where the zoning regulations are not as stringent and taxes are easier to live with.

I would agree if it wasn't for derelict properties. If you have a bank-owned forclosure-- how exactly are you going to drive them from the city? They aren't going to pick up the house and move. What about an absentee investor who isn't taking care of his/her property? Do you really want to convey to them that it's okay because Detroit will take whatever it can get?

If there is a standardized set of rules and enforcement, then it's a great idea. Hold the property owner responsible for the property. Do you really think that other communities outside of Detroit would tolerate such unkempt and abandoned properties? Let them try it.

[Fnemecek]

So the city is going to write a bunch of violations and put leins on the properties owned by the banks with hope of collecting.

One could do that.

Of course, the beauty of a court judgment is that it's against the owner of a given property and not against the property itself. This means that one can go after any assets that the owner owns in an effort to collect. This includes, by the way, any cash that the bank has in its vaults.

There are thousands of cities across the United States that do this.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors considers this to be a best practice when dealing with the vacant properties.

We can either do things that have a proven track record of working or we can sit around complaining.

[Fnemecek]

Yes another brilliant Idea. Let's burden the citizens and businesses of Detroit with another fee, another tax and another disincentive to stay. More taxes and more regulations are not going to fix the city. Stop trying to penalize everyone and continuing to drive them out to the exurbs.

First, it's not a "tax" or "fee" if you only have to pay it when you break the law. If you maintain your property, you don't have to pay it.

Second, as for disincentives, I would argue that our failure to enforce the Property Maintainance Code is a disincentive for every person who does comply to continue living, working, and paying taxes in Detroit.

Third, and perhaps most importantly of all, a person would have to be really, really stupid to move from Detroit to the exburbs in order to pursue a "right" to trash a given property. Exburbs tend to have a much more aggressive code enforcement for these things than any inner city ever would and the penalties tend to be higher as well.

If you doubt me, I invite you to have your favorite exburb resident dump a bag of trash on their front lawn. A ticket will generally appear within a matter of hours and the fine will be several hundred dollars.

This is just another continuation of the policies that have driven businesses and individuals out to the the bordering greenfields. All places where the zoning regulations are not as stringent and taxes are easier to live with.

I don't think you understand what the word "continuation" means.

Continuation means that the policies remain the same. The current policy is to do nothing and allow people to treat our city like a 138 square mile garbage dump.

That is the current policy. If we do the exact opposite of the current policy then, by definition, it is not a continuation.

[ndavies]

So all these added regulations have helped keep the city healthy?

No, it's a continuation of all the policies that ramp up regulations, fines and taxes. It has been happpening over the last 50 years. They continue to make Detroit a very unprofitable place to invest money.

[Fnemecek]

So all these added regulations have helped keep the city healthy?

No, it's a continuation of all the policies that ramp up regulations, fines and taxes. It has been happpening over the last 50 years. They continue to make Detroit a very unprofitable place to invest money.

Oh, really?

I challenge you to name one city - anywhere in the U.S. or Canada, other than Detroit - where a property owner is allowed to disregard the condition of their property with impunity.

Just name one city.

[ndavies]

Why don't you name one city that came back from the dead by adding on regulations taxes and fees.

[NorthofNormal]

I don't know, New York City did pretty well under Guiliani's "broken windows" campaign. Times Square sure looks better/safer/cleaner than it did in the 70's and 80's.

[ndavies]

So you think New york was a dead city. I wouldn't have considered New york a dead city by any stretch of the imagination? Detroit is so far past the tipping point where the broken windows policies would do any good. The broken windows policy will just give the city more buildings to tear down.

[Fnemecek]

New York is a great example, as North of Normal pointed out above. It wasn't that long ago that Time magazine proclaimed it the "Rotten Apple". Rigorous code enforcement did a lot to turn the place around.

Miami Beach, Florida used to be an absolute dump until they got serious about historic preservation and code enforcement in the 1970s.

You asked for one example, but I've given you two. I could go on, but I know you're eager to cite just one example of a city where property owners are allowed to disregard the condition of their property with impunity.

And your answer is...

[ndavies]

Flint,Ypsilanti, ecorse, riverrouge, melvindale........

[Fnemecek]

So you think New york was a dead city. I wouldn't have considered New york a dead city by any stretch of the imagination? Detroit is so far past the tipping point where the broken windows policies would do any good. The broken windows policy will just give the city more buildings to tear down.

NYC in the late 1980s and early 1990s was referred to "the Rotten Apple". It was regularly the butt of jokes on late night talk shows.

Businesses and residents were fleeing the city.

NYC was widely regarded as being headed towards bankruptcy.

Does any of that sound familiar?

[rsa.313]

http://detroitvacantproperty.org/default.htm

http://71.159.23.2/BSEOnline/divisio...n?pageId=10001

<H2>Property Maintenance Division Blight Ordinance Enforcement Information

In November 24, 2004, the City of Detroit adopted amendments to Chapter 9 of the 1984 Detroit City Code, adding the Detroit Blight Ordinance that became effective December 1, 2004.
The Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department [[BSE&ED) enforces sections of the Blight Ordinances governing property maintenance and zoning, maintaining the quality and usefulness of residential and commercial properties.
To make our community a clean, healthy and pleasant place to live, the City of Detroit adopted a new approach for residents and business owners who violate local property maintenance, safety, zoning and health-related ordinances. The City of Detroit BSE&ED Property Maintenance Division will cite citizens and business owners for violations of property maintenance and zoning ordinances.
BSE&ED will cite renters and property owners for:

• Failure to obtain certificates of compliance
• Failure to register rental property
• Rat infestation or problems with rodents
• Failure to register, secure and maintain vacant property
• Violations of inoperable vehicle codes
• Failure to maintain interior and exterior of rental property
• Failure to comply with emergency orders

In addition to the above, Commercial property owners also will be cited for:

• Change of building use without a permit
• Change of land use without a permit
• Failure to obtain a certificate of maintenance of grant conditions
  
  • Violation of Special Land Use Grants
  • Failure to maintain parking lots and exterior of property

Previously, citations issued for these violations were criminal misdemeanors and adjudicated at the 36th District Court. They are now civil offenses, which will be heard and resolved more quickly with more appropriate penalties at the newly created Department of Administrative Hearings [[DAH). DAH has its own hearing facility, independent of the 36th District Court, at 561 East Jefferson in downtown Detroit.

</H2>
from green acres newsletter:

Detroit Vacant Property Ordinance Begins

by Karen Hammer

Come January, inspectors from the Property Maintenance Division will be notifying 95,000 owners of vacant properties of their responsibilities to adhere to new and pre-existing property maintenance regulations. This is the result of a new ordinance approved last July by the City Council. Beginning with major thoroughfares, then residential areas, inspectors will write tickets for blight and for failure to register a property within 30 days of its vacancy. If the ticket isn’t paid, fines are doubled and, if still unpaid, doubled again. After that, it’s sent to a collection agency. Since the order went into effect, the city reports better response rates from bank- and corporate-owned vacant proper-ties, as they really don’t like tickets. To register a vacant property, which re-quires a $25 fee, call 628-2451.
Per the ordinance, the city maps addresses of delinquent landowners, and has secured contractors to board or demolish properties identified by the inspec-tors. Boarding is a priority for resident safety and to prevent further entry. Kim James, the new director of Building Safety and Engineering, is commit-ted to sharing information with communities, especially corroborating va-cant property ownership.
Diligent neighbors can send letters and do follow-up to help their neighbor-hoods and the city achieve the ultimate goal: property maintenance. Green-acres and the other neighborhoods of the 12th Pct. Neighborhood Coalition have begun filing requests for demolition or boarding with Area 1 supervisor Bill Walton [[224-3115). Our area has the fewest requests: 97 commercial and resi-dential vacant properties [[compared to 678 in the highest area).
Future follow-up on these issues includes a website: combining city, county, realtor, and resident reporting information. Dalton Roberson and Mike Brady, of Community Legal Resources, are seeking to expand the Vacant Property Boarding Coalition beyond boarding and code enforcement. Working with De-troit Vacant Property Campaign and Next Detroit Neighborhood Initiative, they strive to involve as many groups as possible. They want feedback and citizen input; you can send yours by sending an email to planinfo@CLRonline.org The next meeting is in January.

[Fnemecek]

Flint,Ypsilanti, ecorse, riverrouge, melvindale........

Flint and Ypsilanti do indeed enforce its property maintainance code.

As for Ecorse, River Rouge, or Melvindale, none of those cities are doing very well in spite of relaxed attitude towards code enforcement.

Detroit has a choice to make: do we follow the strategies that have proven to work in other cities?

Or do follow Ndavies advice and continue the same failed practices over and over again.

[Kevgoblue]

No, it's a continuation of all the policies that ramp up regulations, fines and taxes. It has been happpening over the last 50 years. They continue to make Detroit a very unprofitable place to invest money.

So the city should disregard code enforcement because it makes it unprofitable for investors? I thought the city government was there to provide services for its residents. ????

Have you ever lived next door to a home which is unmaintained? I can tell you from experience, it sucks. And if I wound up living next door to one of the bank or slumlord owned homes again I would pray to God that the city hit them up for every violation, down to peeling paint.
Not sure how you think that forcing people to maintain their property would be a disincentive to investment. I certainly would never chose to "invest" my money somewhere that is located next to a proverbial garbage dump.

[ndavies]

I lived in brush park for 10 years I lived next to some of the most unmaintained buildings in the city. Most of the unmaintained building I lived next to were city owned properties. And you're creating rules that would put more buildings in the hands of the city.

Just keep adding to the rules and watch the investment money continue to flow to anywhere other than Detroit.

[Fnemecek]

The issue isn't "adding rules". It's all about enforcing the rules that are on the books.

The same rules, I might add, that pretty much every other city in the industrialized world enforces on a daily basis.

A lack of enforcement hasn't produced any benefit for Detroiters. Meanwhile, consistent enforcement has done wonders for every city that has done it.

As for watching "investment flow to anywhere but Detroit", that's pretty much what we have now. Investment is flowing away from areas with non-existent enforcement and it's going to the places with strong code enforcement.

[bailey]

Well, to ndavies point-- will the city be enforcing the rules against city owned property? That seems to be the first hurdle. When you have two similarly blighted properties, one in private hands and one in the city's and only the one in private hands subject to penalties it sort of undermines the effort doesn't it?

[Fnemecek]

The City should follow its own rules. Of course, an even better course of action is get properties out of the City's hands and into the hands of private investors.

[detmsp]

So all these added regulations have helped keep the city healthy?

No, it's a continuation of all the policies that ramp up regulations, fines and taxes. It has been happpening over the last 50 years. They continue to make Detroit a very unprofitable place to invest money.

So true. The Cheesecake Factory and House of Blues were totally set on opening Detroit locations until they discovered that they would be fined if they closed down their new stores and left them open to the elements, scrappers, squatters, etc for years. One prominent exec from the Cheesecake Factory told me that this was the deal breaker. He said that one of the most important things they look for in a new location is the ease of abandonment.

[JBMcB]

Of course, the beauty of a court judgment is that it's against the owner of a given property and not against the property itself. This means that one can go after any assets that the owner owns in an effort to collect. This includes, by the way, any cash that the bank has in its vaults.

The problem I see with this is, if it becomes too expensive for banks to hold on and try to sell the properties normally, they'll just dump them for pennies on the dollar. This will further depress the Detroit real estate market, basically screwing over existing homeowners. The people or companies who buy from them won't necessarily keep the properties up, either.

[laurin]

The problem I see with this is, if it becomes too expensive for banks to hold on and try to sell the properties normally, they'll just dump them for pennies on the dollar. This will further depress the Detroit real estate market, basically screwing over existing homeowners. The people or companies who buy from them won't necessarily keep the properties up, either.

I see your point, however, how do other areas/cities manage to avoid this? There are foreclosures nationwide, but none of them touch the scale of damage that Detroit does [[I know that you have to account for crime). The banks would be forced to secure and maintain properties, but since it's Detroit the banks would recoil in horror? Maintain the property-- that is all the property compliance codes/penalties would seek. It's only seeking to hold them accountable for their properties. They shouldn't be allowed to hold the city/residents over a barrel and make residents scared to ask for basic property care.

Sidenote: I think in Detroit when some properties foreclose, they get transferred to HUD. I know someone who lost their home in Detroit and received a letter that it was being transferred to HUD for whatever that's worth.

[Fnemecek]

The problem I see with this is, if it becomes too expensive for banks to hold on and try to sell the properties normally, they'll just dump them for pennies on the dollar. This will further depress the Detroit real estate market, basically screwing over existing homeowners. The people or companies who buy from them won't necessarily keep the properties up, either.

As a homeowner in the city of Detroit, I have a couple of things to say about this.

1. Houses are already selling for pennies on the dollar in comparison to what they were selling for even 2 or 3 years ago.
2. Properties that aren't being maintained do infinitely more damage to my property value than any dumping by the banks ever could.

[Fnemecek]

I see your point, however, how do other areas/cities manage to avoid this?

It's simple: they enforce their respective property maintainance codes.

Crappy irresponsible property owners are eventually forced to either become responsible or leave the market. New, more responsible, property owners invariably step in because they know that there is money to be made and they're not afraid to do it properly.