City says ordinance helps give problem properties a closer look — and action

The article says, "The city’s nuisance ordinance is a sort of catch-all, giving officials the ability to “initiate an internal investigation when a property accumulates six ‘incidents’ within a six-month period.” An incident can include a call to the police or fire department, a code enforcement complaint or a call to the city’s Constituent Services Department."

Six complaints from the public in a six month period is a very high bar to clear before any kind of investigation can commence. Most members of the public are too busy to be lodging complaints. Some members of the public may assume that others have already made complaints. Others may feel that it is not their job to complain (which it isn't). If this is the kind of system you are going to use, I would change it to two or three complaints in a six month period, or make it six complaints in a two year period.

Or better yet, get rid of the complaint system entirely. The City should have its own large department of inspectors who go out into neighborhoods everyday to see what needs to be taken care of, then report back to the City with a long list of well-documented concerns that need to be addressed. And then the inspectors can follow-up on their own complaints to make sure that things are being taken care of in a timely way.

The article also mentions a situation in which the City supposedly required a homeowner to install security equipment. I doubt very much that it happened this way. The City might have suggested that security equipment would be helpful, but I don't think the City can require anyone to install security equipment. If security equipment is helpful (which it is), then the City should be installing more of its own security equipment in problem areas.