Properties like this building - boarded windows, showing fire damage with broken rain gutter and graffiti - on Third Street downtown could come under greater enforcement action as the city reviews how it deals with unsightly properties.--News Photo Collin Gallant
cgallant@medicinehatnews.com@CollinGallant
City Hall will focus on how it takes action – or hasn’t – against owners of dilapidated buildings after council voted to study the issue and senior staff said an overhaul in processes is needed.
It comes two weeks after Coun. Shila Sharps signalled she would ask for a formal review of the city’s “Unsightly Property Bylaws” at Tuesday’s council meeting, where administrators say current enforcement also needs examination.
“Truthfully, I feel like the bylaw is weak, hard to enforce and once it’s enforced, what are we doing other than giving out a ticket?” said Sharps on Tuesday. “We can be protected from the detrimental effects of vacant and derelict properties, offering a safer environment for all our residents.”
The News has learned that 244 complaints about unsightly properties were received in the first nine months of 2023. As well, 23 properties are on a list for regular monitoring by bylaw officers and the planning department.
That’s among about 25,000 residential properties inside city limits, but still “concerning,” said city manager Ann Mitchell.
Council members agreed on a review of the bylaw language to determine stiffening penalties or finding new avenues to compel property owners to clean up or improve buildings. That is due in early 2024, but organizational changes and the tone of prosecutions could come sooner.
“It’s two separate issues, but this (operational review) is something we will be talking about this week,” said Mitchell. “All of these problems factor into something else. We have low housing inventory, a housing shortage, we have derelict buildings and we have safe community (issues).
“To me this is something with some urgency.”
Currently, bylaw officers have the ability to investigate complaints and issue tickets and orders to rectify problems.
If, for example, orders to secure a building, mow weeds or clean up refuse are not followed, the city can contract the work and put the cost on to the specific property’s tax bill.
Owners have the ability to appeal orders to the city’s subdivision and appeal board, and then the Alberta Court of King’s Bench.
Coun. Ramona Robins says she would like to see cost-benefit results included from a standpoint of the tax assessment base.
“It’s all well and good to say we’ll get rid of every junky-looking house in Medicine Hat, but that may come at a cost that we may never recuperate,” she said.
Coun. Andy McGrogan says he’s gone on walking tours with residents who live near problem properties and says something needs to change.
“We need to demonstrate to the community that we see there’s a problem, and that we’ll look for more effective ways to deal with it,” he said. “If nothing else it sends a message to our police service and bylaw enforcement folks that we need a fresh look at this.”
Coun. Robert Dumanowski says he will support the review, but the issue can be complex. Structures damaged by fire, for example, can sit for long periods of time until insurance claims are finalized.
“Looking at it doesn’t hurt, but I wonder what our reach (with a new bylaw) will be,” he said.
The existing bylaw dates back to the 1990s and was last amended in 2011.
