Land banking (southern-style): Could this work for Springfield?

[ChriswUfGator]

Chris,

If the mothball ordinance were changed to remove all accumulated rolling fines, that would accomplish a great deal, wouldn't it?

But what about the Tarpon owned properties?  How can they be encouraged to put their properties in the hands of people who will care for them?

And btw, I agree with everything you say regarding your concerns on land banking.

I think your first point hit the nail on the head. As to the tarpon funding issue, though I'm as frustrated with that as you are, the reality is that's probably <10% of the problem. This is basically triage at this point, 1/3 of a national historic district has been demolished, mostly in the past 10 years, and COJ (well...and SPAR) did that, not tarpon. We need to fix the big problem first and then worry about individual bad apples like tarpon later. Something will need to be done about them eventually, but for now let's stop worrying about punishing people and let go of the false notion that the city is ever going to collect any of these fines ($100k in fines on a $2k vacant lot, they really think they're ever going to see any of that money anyway?) and get the situation stabilized.

[sheclown]

So, before we give COJ even more power, perhaps we need to work on harnessing the power they already have and so badly abuse?

Good point.   

[sheclown]

Here's a pretty interesting look at how a few places are using federal funds to stablize certain areas of town. I guess Jax is currently utilizing a strategy similar to Detroit, except we don't see the importance of following the rules for some reason.

What Chicago can learn from other locales, and vice versa

Chicago is not alone in thinking about how to use NSP dollars to create affordable rentals and stabilize neighborhoods.

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which administers the NSP, said funds are being applied differently in cities and counties across the country, according to each place's temperament. Some places – such as Detroit and Cuyahoga County, in Ohio – use demolition as a primary strategy for stabilizing communities. Other locales started off with a strategy that emphasized homeownership and have since shifted to more rental approaches.

In Milwaukee, for example, there is strong demand for affordable rental apartments. Between 400 and 500 rental units were created in Milwaukee using money from the second round of NSP, said Maria Prioletta, the city's redevelopment manager. She said because more units are at stake than with single-family home transactions, rehabbing apartments allows the city to have a strategic impact on particular neighborhoods.

Ditto for Pinellas County, Florida, which comprises St. Petersburg and Clearwater and has endured a large number of foreclosures in the past few years.

Anthony Jones, the county's community development director, said the housing crisis showed that homeownership isn't necessarily good for everyone, especially people of modest means.  So he and his colleagues have worked to acquire and rehab rental units as part of their evolving approach to using NSP funds.

When asked if he had any advice for Chicago as it embarks down this new path of creating rentals in concentrated areas, Jones said Chicago should consider putting properties in land trusts, which can impose rental price restrictions beyond the limits required by the NSP, and for longer periods of time.

Maybe, said Ludwig, but land trusts can also serve as a deterrent to potential investors. And, she said, rents are already low in the Chicago neighborhoods where the NSP is focused.

http://www.chicagonsp.org/news/1510

The difference between those examples and what we've done is that using NSP funds for demolition is generally considered appropriate by HUD in areas suffering population loss, it's something of a last resort. We've actually had a growing, not shrinking, population, and given our local conditions it was really a gross misuse of funds that could have positively impacted the community.

Furthermore, and I don't think this can be understated.

The demolitions which are occurring with land bank activities are for homes purchased with NSP funds. 

In Jacksonville, we use NSP funds to demolish a house without any compensation to the owner and often AGAINST the owners wishes (see the two demos on east 2nd Street for a recent example).  Then a significant demo lien a placed on that empty lot to further harm the owner and poison the land on which the historic property once sat.

[thelakelander]

People want to live in neighborhoods like Springfield. Seems like COJ is using a tool that is meant to help as an obstacle instead. Thus, the answer is a simple one. Use federal funds to facilitate growth and redevelopment instead of killing it. This starts and ends with COJ's policies, IMO.

[ChriswUfGator]

So, before we give COJ even more power, perhaps we need to work on harnessing the power they already have and so badly abuse?

Good point.   

Well...it's probably easier to fix than all that, one individual at COJ has caused most of the problem. That's at least partially fixable by going back and taking out the vastly expanded definition of what constitutes an "emergency" that literally defines it as whatever Kim Scott feels like it is. The revised definitions slipped through when SPAR's board member was on the HPC, MCCD's lawyer was simultaneously serving as the HPC's general counsel, and SPAR (the alleged preservation group) was pushing HPC and MCCD for wholesale demolitions. What could possibly go wrong?

Whatever has to be done to correct the incest problem clearly needs to be done, or no amount of land banking, fine waivers, or anything else is going to fix it. With each demolition it becomes an increasingly uphill battle for the neighborhood to come back, and it needs to stop. This is largely a one-person-problem, which is the easiest kind to fix if the city really wanted to.

The second problem is that COJ is causing much of the blight it complains of with bad policy decisions. They've already permanently blighted 1/3 of the housing stock with demolitions, and they're blighting another 1/3 or so of it with aggressive fines and liens that continue to accrue until the owners (direct quote) "restore or demolish" the entire property. Which isn't happening because they can't get financing with the fines and liens, they can't sell it to someone else who'd fix it up because they can't sell clear of the fines and liens, and really what's the point anyway, even if they fixed it up they're still going to owe more in fines than it's worth.

I understand the theory of fining someone to make them do what you want, and I'd imagine the roadways are at least marginally safer because of traffic fines. But it backfires when you go as absolutely bonkers with it as COJ does, they assess fines that quickly exceed the value of the entire house, which forces the owners to throw in the towel and walk because they have no other option. COJ's policies manage to turn what generally starts off as simple code citations into a permanent blight on the neighborhood.

Both of these issues need fixing. The first one is really a no-brainer, one-person-problems are the easiest to fix, and changing the definition of a word in the municipal code requires little work. The second issue, the fines, requires rational thought and will on the part of the city, and so far that's been quite a challenge. But land banking isn't the answer, you want these properties to be marketable again, not continuing to languish in a land bank, that's the same problem we already have now.

[thelakelander]

Why can't COJ waive fines? Is the expected collection money being committed elsewhere?

[ChriswUfGator]

Why can't COJ waive fines? Is the expected collection money being committed elsewhere?

Pie-in-the-sky thinking is the issue. The fines total over a hundred million dollars, and the city gets greedy just looking at the numbers. The problem is when you dig into it most of that balance is comprised of rolling fines that have been running, and while there may be a $400k fine floating out there on paper, it's secured by a $2k vacant lot or a $20k vacant house. In reality it's uncollectible. But getting them to let go of what they think looks like a pot of money on paper is still incredibly difficult.

In meetings they'll argue with you about well what if even only 10% is collectible, look how much money that is. Except it isn't. I'd be surprised if 1% of the outstanding rolling fines assessed in Springfield were actually collectible, and that's only if the city actually went around and started foreclosing on its liens, but then you'd have to reduce the figure by the cost of the foreclosure suit, which would be pointless because the first mortgagee would eventually wind up getting it anyway, and even if there was no mortgage and COJ took it at the auction they'd still have to pay the existing tax certificate holders when they tried to sell it. A tax deed doesn't wipe out their fines, but a foreclosure judgment wouldn't wipe out existing tax certificates either and the certificate holders would just sit and wait, a real catch 22. I've thought about this and I'm 100% sure that COJ would actually wind up losing money if they ever tried to collect these. But if you ask MCCD, they think they've brought in $100mm+ to the city.

[sheclown]

I believe -- only 1 fine has been paid

[sheclown]

So....this is why Land banking (southern-style) may not work for Springfield?

1.) Lack of trust in COJ's ability to take property -- even when the property is neglected and the owner is absent.  No faith that the system wouldn't be corrupted, abused, or just flawed by lack of checks and balances (see recent federal fund issues & lack of code enforcement oversight).

2.) Lack of need for land banking -- blighted structures can be "rescued" by dissembling current poor policies ie. rolling fines, arbitrary and vague condemnation practices.   

3.) Proper and wise use of CDBG money and NSP funding can do much to restore Springfield, if used as it is designed and with proper transparency.

Is anyone FOR  land banking?

[Debbie Thompson]

In a perfect world, my preference would be for the remaining un-rehabbed homes to get into the hands of people who will rehab them.  I can't see where letting them sit any longer, un-rehabbed, would be beneficial. That said, whatever it takes to save them, I'm for it.  :-)

[sheclown]

Lake, thanks for the link to this video:

http://www.youtube.com/v/-mAVaUbJX7k?hl=en_US&amp;version=3&amp;rel=0

It does look like Chicago is making the most of its NSP money.

[JayBird]

I like the land banking idea, at least on paper.

Is there anything that states these NSP Funds must be administered by COJ? Would it be possible a current not-for-profit or a group of community members to form their own NFP specifically to administer the use of these funds under the direction/supervision of the City? COJ would then be responsible for final approval of money use, but the overall planning and day to day operations would be coordinated by this new community-based agency. In turn, they could use the land banking idea on a short term basis (i.e. No property may sit in land bank for more than 24/36 months) to get the most "in need" properties developed. It would also be beneficial if such an agency/community board oversaw these rolling fines, because they could issue them on a case by case basis instead of across the board (because, let's face it, Joe Blow who is rebuilding his house on weekends should not be held to the same level of responsibility as a licensed contractor who purchases several properties in an attempt to "flip" them). COJ would benefit because the ultimate goal of the agency would be to get the properties back in the black side of the tax rolls ($5m/yr in new tax money is better than $100m maybe sorta possibly money sometime in the future).

[sheclown]

Yes. The emergency services homeless coalition does this with the federal grants for homeless services. The same system could be used for not just the nsp but also the CDBG monies. In fact I believe Pensacola handles their funds this way.

http://escambia.communityos.org/sys/profile.taf?profiletype=service&textonly=&recordid=174767&_UserReference=AC1E020147190F8460F4761A58734DE42A4E

[strider]

So....this is why Land banking (southern-style) may not work for Springfield?

1.) Lack of trust in COJ's ability to take property -- even when the property is neglected and the owner is absent.  No faith that the system wouldn't be corrupted, abused, or just flawed by lack of checks and balances (see recent federal fund issues & lack of code enforcement oversight).

2.) Lack of need for land banking -- blighted structures can be "rescued" by dissembling current poor policies ie. rolling fines, arbitrary and vague condemnation practices.   

3.) Proper and wise use of CDBG money and NSP funding can do much to restore Springfield, if used as it is designed and with proper transparency.

Is anyone FOR  land banking?

How many times have heard the likes of Kimberly Scott say that Jacksonville is not in the real-estate business?  How many times have we heard a Council member say the same thing?  Or that they are not in the repair business?  And yet, we know what the ordinances say and allow for, apparently more than the people charged with enforcing them do.  The problem is that our leadership has allowed the minions, like Kimberly Scott, to interpret the ordinances anyway they wished and have been allowing it to go on for years. 

Even the Office of General Council seems to be guilty of the same thing.  Remember when we were doing the mothballing ordinances, how often did we hear that Municipal Code Compliance would not agree to this or that?  A hired employee like Kimberly Scott can dictate to Jason Teal how an ordinance should be written?  She has enough power to prevent it from being written the way it should have been?  Then of course, she gets to ignore it after it is passed?

It appears that unless the ordinances involved are radically changed and changed so that the abuse of power we so often see is prevented no matter who is in the various positions nothing we do will work in the end.

This is why we need a land bank ordinance.  We need to get the power over the fate of the historic houses out of the hands of employees who care more about their own egos than what is right and into the hands of people who truly care what happens to Jacksonville.

[sheclown]

It was Warren Jones who said "the city isn't in the business of rehabbing private property". Right there at a city council meeting.

So...all of this CDBG money spent on rehabbing private property? 

No wonder we are in the mess we're in.