Here’s how the legislation would work: If a property has three or more “chronic nuisance activities” on separate days within a 30-day period, police would report that property to the city manager’s office. Such a report also could be triggered by a single felony offense.
If the property fits the profile of a chronic nuisance — the perpetrators live there, for instance, rather than being victims of the crime — the landlords or other property owners would be notified, and would be required to develop a plan to eliminate the problem. If the problems are not resolved, the property would receive the chronic nuisance.
For criminal offenses that follow, the city could assess civil fines of $250 per violation going forward, plus the costs of each police visit to the property that follows, including the police salaries and benefits for each officer.
Charles Tassell, who chaired the ad-hoc committee that developed the legislation and is director of government affairs for the Greater Cincinnati Northern Kentucky Apartment Association, has said his committee approves of the proposed ordinance, although one member came out against it at a May 31 public hearing, and others expressed concerns about some of the provisions.
Others, including the Butler-Warren Association of Realtors, through its president, Kelly Umbstead, suggested alterations.
Umbstead has called the legislation “deeply flawed,” and said her organization, after consulting with its national legal counsel, is prepared to fight it in court because it would violate property owners’ due-process rights.
Hamilton City Council also will consider the legislation at its June 28 meeting.
In another matter, the council will consider legislation extending a contract with the Great Miami Valley YMCA to operate the city-owned Booker T. Washington Community Center at a cost of $100,000 annually for two more years. The city and Y first agreed to the contract in 2013.
About the Author