Another nuisance property approaches zero hour, in which the city will take matters into its own hands and clean the lot up at a cost to the owner.
Litchfield City Council made it abundantly clear that it’s appetite for remedying the town of messy lots, unsightly homes and hazardous properties at the Dec. 3 meeting has yet to be quelled. The council unanimously approved allotting 21 days for a property located at 1002 S. Armstrong Ave. to remove debris and forgotten furniture, equipment, appliances, wood and other items. City staff have estimated that this cleanup will cost close to $2,500.
Four letters sent over four months led to the council’s decision to act as the property owner, whose address is in Gilbert, Arizona, gave no response, as of the Dec. 3 meeting. The owner must install an operable garage door, remove items from the yard and dispose of trash before the 21-day deadline, as of the receipt of a letter including the council’s decision, before the city takes action.
The city of Litchfield has a hazardous building fund that is separate from the general fund to deal with nuisance properties. City Administrator Dave Cziok said at the Dec. 3 council meeting that it would be one of those funds that the city would need to look at in March or April to refund itself.
“In the past, we haven’t needed to replenish any balance in that account, and moving forward, we are probably going to need to have – if we continue down this path – dare I say, nearly $100,000 in that fund,” Cziok said. “[We will need] a significant amount of money in that fund until we start realizing revenues from taxes.”
As of now, the hazardous building fund has about $63,000. Councilmember Ron Dingmann said that will not take long to use up, including attorney fees.
Cziok said the city may find in the coming years that the expense becomes predictable, and it can be included in the operating budget.
“We will know what our attorney fees are,” Cziok said. “We will know what are removal fees are, give or take, we can just stick it in the budget.”
Cziok said the city will have to wait and see how successful they are at removing the nuisance properties and the associated costs.
“Let’s just say that if the costs are at $100,000 a property, our appetite, if we continue to do this, might diminish a little bit,” Cziok said. “But, I don’t predict that to be the case.”
Councilmember Vernon Loch said if the city continues to be aggressive, there must be a return on the investment.
“In three years we should see the fund balance supplying itself,” Loch said.
Mayor Keith Johnson said he thinks it’s important that the council continues to look at hazardous properties.
“It’s tax-payer money well spent,” Johnson said.
