The city of Dayton passed an ordinance on May 3 to establish civil penalties for code enforcement violations.
The ordinance will allow the city to cite a violation of $50 every day that the homeowner does not correct the problem. The violation will stop once the homeowner fixes the issue or reaches out to Dayton’s Code Enforcement Director Cassie Patterson with evidence that the offense is being taken care of.
Fines cannot exceed $5,000 per violation.
The first reading of this ordinance took place at the last city council meeting on April 19. More information from that meeting can be found here.
Dayton City Council members Scott Beseler and Beth Nyman hesitated to pass the ordinance.
Councilmember Beseler cited information from his past experiences with the previous Dayton Code Enforcement and City Administrator, who made waiving violations or extending time on a violation very difficult. Beseler was concerned about what might happen if new people filled these roles with the new ordinance and if things would get taken too far.
“I’m just saying these tools may not only serve us, but they also serve future generations, and all the people involved may not be as nice as all these people in this room right now,” Beseler said.
Councilmember Nyman agreed. She said she had been around long enough to know when an ordinance says “can” or “may,” it’s subjective to the person and the administration to honor that.
Beseler’s concerns are for people in dire financial situations who can’t afford the $50 a day fines for their gutter falling off or their paint peeling off their house.
“Our current rules seem to be effectively moving these properties that are vacant towards compliance,” Beseler said. “So, the stricter rules, yes, it’ll expedite it quicker, but at what expense? If you want faster quote foreclosures, this is a great method for that. If you want to get the same job done, but it takes longer, our current rules are already doing that.”
Nyman agreed with Beseler, saying she just had to spend $5,000 to fix her front porch, and sympathizes with people who can’t afford to make the repairs.
“I don’t know how to work this to differentiate the people we’re all concerned about versus somebody who just gets caught, but they don’t deserve to lose their house,” Nyman said.
Dayton City Administrator Jay Fossett argued that the city was taking measures to consider the residents struggling financially. He said they are working with the housing authority to create a $100,000 loan fund for low to moderate-income homeowners that might have a code violation.
“We’re trying to address those concerns you have about people who can’t afford to repair their properties to allow them to do it,” Fossett said. “The idea is to make the neighborhoods where these houses are better. Because the people next door are maintaining their houses, and they’re being penalized because the person next door might be an absentee landlord or that just doesn’t care. We’ve got so many properties that are just abandoned or not being worked on because they can get away with it.”
Patterson said the people who call and keep code enforcement updated on their status usually don’t get fined.
The city’s biggest problem is not with their average resident but with hedge fund groups who purchase multiple homes in the city and leave them sitting vacant. According to Patterson, a hedge fund with an office in North Carolina and California invested in approximately 30 properties in Dayton and is neglecting to take care of them.
“Unfortunately, there’s really nice houses with one of those stuck right in the middle. So, we do get a lot of complaints,” Patterson said.
Councilmember Jeff Volter said he thinks the new ordinance needs to be implemented. As a Dayton resident, he said he doesn’t want to live next to an abandoned or foreclosed house, nor does he want one on his block.
“The city administrator mentioned it was an LLC model. I know many other communities in Northern Kentucky use this model. We’re not different than any of them.” Volter said.
Councilmember Neary was also in favor of the ordinance and said the most important part was being overlooked in the discussion.
“You’re missing part C, which is ‘if the property owner timely appeals the violations to the code enforcement board,'” Neary said. “So, even if she (Patterson) wants to nail them, the code enforcement board, who are people that live in this city, can waive that fine.”
After discussion by the council, the ordinance passed unanimously.
