Housing Court

[Sharonite]

I think that, in addition to the housing court, the city needs to start an aggressive code inspection program.  City landlords would be required to pay a yearly fee (say $100) to cover an inspection to make sure the homes are up to code before they could be licensed to be rented.  Homes not up to code would be slammed with DAILY penalties and/or be referred to the housing court.  Landlords who refuse to pay the inspection fee will also be referred.  In Youngstown, about 1/3 of the housing (12,000 units) is renter-occupied, so a $100 inspection fee per unit would generate $1.2 million per year.  That money could be used not only to pay the salaries of the code officers that would be needed but also bolster the city's demolition and community development funds.  It would go a long way toward ridding the city of blight.

[jay]

I attended the housing court meeting on March 18.  The councilmen hosting the event lost control of the meeting during the 11:00 hour.

If you attended the meeting, what are your opinions concerning housing code enforcement?

[kitten44505]

On E-bay you can see city houses being sold, and when you view the photos that are included, it's clear that they are a prime target for slumlords.

Drive up Elm Street past Thornton Street and what do you see? Houses that should be torn down AT THE OWNERS EXPENSE.

Busted windows and doors standing wide open.

At one point no fewer than four of these houses were being peddled on E-bay. ALL OF THEM FIRE TRAPS!

[AllanY2525]

The issue of vacant, delapidated and (in many cases)
outright dangerous residential structures is a big one
for Youngstown.

I read an article online a few weeks ago that said there
are many buildings already on the demolition list, but the
city only has a limited amount of funds available to
demolish them.

I think the city should definitely go after owners who
do not maintain their properties - in many cases the
city does a title search after several complaints about
a particular property and tries to locate the owner, only
to find that they have left the area or died.

Given the number of houses that really do need to come
down and the limited funds available, the city should make
every effort to extract the cost of tearing down vacant
houses that are beyond repair from the owners of those
houses whenever possible.  It is not fair to expect the
city to bear the full financial cost of demolishing these
buildings.

The city now has about twice the housing stock it actually
needs, so it is inevitable that the number of abandoned,
delapidated and vacant houses will continue to trend upward
for the forseeable future.  The sooner the city gets rid
of the unrepairable houses, the better for everyone.

Landlords who do not keep up their properties are
also diminishing the property values for all of their
neighbors, as well as creating eye-sores for the city.

Vacant homes with no windows and doors, collapsing roofs,
etc. also present a danger to neighborhood children who
might venture into them, or attract vandals and other
criminal elements to hang out in them.

[kitten44505]

Sorry but I have no sympathy for people who buy up city homes then refuse to keep them up. It makes no sense... invest in a home then let it go until it falls down, getting the rent from Section 8, and expecting people to live in substandard housing.

They wouldn't get away with it in the suburbs, so why should they be allowed to get away with it in the city?

Try it in Canfield or Poland.

Most of the fires in the city involve substandard houses, so don't give me any excuses.

As for those who do buy up houses in the city then let them go to pot, they deserve to loose their investment.

There are landlords that DO keep up their rentals and it shows, and they have nothing to worry about a Housing Court, but DO NOT expect any sympathy from me where SLUMLORDS are concerned.

[solomia]

correction straight is the spelling, also foreclosure happens then who is the blame , the bank, the city, not
the owner past eviction

[kitten44505]

The city has created a "new" housing court in an effort to handle the city's housing problems (SLUMS), but given it's past record, which can only be considered as being an udder failure it is VERY DOUBTFUL that it will accomplish anything more than the last attempt.

There is NO question about the need to rip out sub-standard housing and hold the owners financially responsable. These slumlords should either be forced to pay 100% of the demolition costs or go streight to jail ... do not pass Go ... do not collect $200.00.