The city of Austin received numerous complaints about nuisance properties in 2017. In response, city leaders say they are taking a more proactive approach to alleviate the problem.

“Anything that can be seen by the public that is in violation of one of our (building and zoning) ordinances or causes a health or safety issue is considered a nuisance,” said Austin Planning and Zoning Director Holly Wallace. “It could also be something that you can’t observe. It could be something interior that we find after taking a complaint.”

Last year, the city received 328 complaints about ordinance violations. Many complaints dealt with substandard building interiors and exteriors, garbage removal and vehicle parking/storage. However, junk removal was at the top of the list, with 137 complaints filed.

“These are complaints that were actually called or emailed to us,” Wallace said, adding that most complaints are made anonymously out of fear of retaliation.

In response, the city took 1,023 enforcement actions last year, including inspections and letters informing property owners that they were in violation of building and zoning ordinances. The City Council reviewed 95 of the more severe cases. Of those cases, 14 ended in city-enforced clean-up while nine property owners received administrative fines. Property owners are charged for the city-enforced clean-ups, which are conducted by the city’s Street Department. If they fail to pay the bills, the total is assessed to their property taxes.

Austin is not the only city with nuisance property problems. According to Albert Lea Public Safety Director Dwaine Winkels, Albert Lea officials received 205 complaints of junk vehicles and 199 complaints of trash/refuse in 2017. Of those complaints, 21 vehicles were towed and 15 properties were cleaned by the city.

Wallace said the main concern for Austin at this time is getting the hazardous structures removed. The city tore down four hazardous structures in 2016 and six in 2017.

In comparison, Albert Lea city officials tore down four hazardous structures in 2016 and one in 2017, according to Winkels.

“Those properties are usually vacant and seem to be more attractive to criminal activity,” Wallace said. “Or they are properties that we know aren’t going to be reinvested in. Finding a property owner that would be on the hook to make repairs is an issue with the hazardous structures.”

Wallace pointed out that many complaints made against other properties came from people trying to sell their homes.

“Anytime someone tries to sell their property, they start looking at the neighboring properties,” she said. “I don’t know if the Realtors say, ‘You’ll have a hard time selling this,’ but the people trying to sell their property are the ones most concerned about anything that looks bad.”

While the cost of enforcement is apparent, the presence of nuisance properties has a deeper cost, as explained by City Administrator Craig Clark.

“There’s an impact to the neighborhood,” he said. “It’s not just enforcement and administrative costs, it’s also property values. If a landlord or homeowner asks what’s the problem with them draining the equity out of a home and not taking care of the home, the city’s position is about protecting the tax base and ensuring there’s housing stock available for folks. It is a labor-intensive task to go after these things and some communities try to bury their heads in the sand and hope it goes away, but it doesn’t.”

“You send a message to people who visit our community,” Wallace added. “When people want to invest in your community or if they’re thinking about living here, you’re sending a message to them too. If we have abandoned houses, it looks bad. There’s the health and safety aspect too. People don’t want garbage blowing around or attracting vermin.”

The council has urged the city to be more aggressive on the matter and recent efforts have been made to control the nuisance property problem. A new comprehensive property maintenance code was passed last year, which Wallace said improved upon the minimum housing code the city used to have.

The Rental License and Inspection Committee has been working on a new rental property ordinance, using a similar ordinance in Faribault as a model. According to Wallace and Clark, rental properties make up 30 percent of Austin’s housing properties, but accounted for 60 percent of the complaints last year. Under the proposed ordinance, registration of rental properties with the city would become mandatory as opposed to the previous voluntary registration. Empty rental properties would have to be inspected by the city before they could be rented to new tenants. They would also be subject to inspection every two years. Annual licensing fees from landlords would fund the process. Wallace said she recently met with the Landlord Association about the ordinance and received “neutral to positive responses.”

“Part of what we’ve worked on with the rental-housing ordinance is protecting the property values,” Clark said. “That’s our tax base. Without that, we have a much harder time running the operations of the city. If the bottom drops out of your housing stock, you’ve got problems, so we’re trying to address that in a proactive manner.”

The city also urges people to call if they spot and ordinance violation.

“We want people to feel free to call the Planning and Zoning department,” Clark said. “If they have a concern about something being a violation, we’re going to take a look at it.”

Starting Monday, Jan. 29, the city will have a functioning link to streamline the reporting of nuisance properties. That link, which will allow for anonymous reporting, will be available at https://talktomycity.com/complaint-form.

“We’ve got a lot more tools than we’ve had,” Wallace said. “We’re excited to see as we move forward if we are making a significant impact. We need to look at all of the ways we can impact the community and one of those is to maintain properties and the quality of life for the people in those neighborhoods.”