Kelly Kenoyer
The City Council held its first reading last week for an ordinance which would fine owners of derelict buildings and require a higher level of maintenance for vacant commercial and industrial properties.
The ordinance was originally proposed earlier this year, but the first vote on Tuesday, Nov. 25, was the first on the matter. It passed with four votes in favor: Mayor Greg Mahler and Councilors Lisa Gourley, Susan Coleman and Dave Trask; and Councilor Diane Gerson voting against, with Councilors James Goble and Cortney Nash absent.
The ordinance will apply to buildings in commercial and industrial areas that are vacant; those with tenants are not subject to the requirements.
The intent is to “keep the property from being a nuisance,” said Community and Economic Development Director Blair Larsen.
“The intent is not to punish someone for having an empty building,” he said. “There clearly is a need to have some basic care put into these buildings.”
The ordinance requires the owner to have a local agent who is in charge of the welfare of their vacant building, to keep the premises free of weeds, dead vegetation, graffiti, and trash. It also requires regular lawn and plant care, that fences and gates be in sound condition and good repair, as well as foundations, basements, cellars, and crawl spaces remaining in sound and watertight condition. Exterior walls are required to be free of holes, and exterior windows and doors must be in sound and lockable condition, with no broken glass.
Larsen suggested a few changes to the ordinance as it was written for the council’s initial consideration: First, to require some language about good roof condition in the ordinance, and second, to allow the local property manager to live slightly further away than “within 30 miles,” so a relevant party could live in Corvallis or Albany and still qualify.
The ordinance also requires regular visits from the local agent in charge of the building to confirm its condition, which the councilors set at once a month after some discussion.
“The conversation has been about chronically vacant buildings, not people who are trying to rent them out.” Gourley said. “I have very little sympathy for people who do that to our community.”
She added that the ordinance won’t impact building owners who are operating in “good faith.”
“If we want to make them uncomfortable, I’m OK with that. It makes us all uncomfortable to drive by those empty buildings.”
Larsen said the ordinance will have some bite: “Each day of being not in compliance would count as a new violation,” Larsen said. While the court that enforces the ordinance will have discretion in the fine amount, the daily charge will be no more than $500.
“The idea is to get compliance,” he added.
“It’s economically feasible for them to leave those vacant, so hitting them in the pocketbook to me is better than requiring them to have a property manager,” Gerson said. She voiced some concern about the wording of the ordinance, as it appeared to require a hired property manager from the area.
Larsen said it instead requires a “local agent,” who could be any person in the vicinity of Sweet Home.
The amended ordinance which the council approved requires a roof in sound and watertight condition and only requires monthly inspections.
That vote in favor of the ordinance moves it to a second reading, with a third reading being the final step to make the ordinance law.