The case of Mr. Novak, who owns a vacant building severely damaged by fire in December 2020, took center stage. Novak has been battling financial constraints since the incident, exacerbated by being under-insured and facing rising construction costs during the pandemic. The council was presented with an assessment of $5,077, part of the ongoing fees Novak owes due to his property’s vacant status under the city’s program. Novak detailed his plight to the council, explaining the gap between the insurance payout of $139,000 and the actual repair costs, which soared to $380,000. This financial burden, coupled with administrative delays and errors in the permitting process, has left him unable to complete necessary repairs.

Novak argued that the fees imposed on his residential property should differ from those on commercial properties, highlighting his struggle to afford nearly $3,000 in monthly payments. Council members expressed sympathy, discussing options such as extending the payment plan from five to seven years to ease Novak’s financial load. A suggestion was also made to waive the current year’s assessment if Novak could complete construction. However, the council acknowledged legal constraints regarding assessment periods, which typically do not exceed five years.

The broader implications of the vacant building program were also considered, with council members recognizing the disparity faced by individual homeowners compared to larger commercial entities. The necessity for transparency and potential community support to assist homeowners like Novak was emphasized. The council decided to defer a final decision on the matter until March 26, allowing time to explore legal and practical solutions to extend payment terms and provide additional resources to Novak.

The council also addressed the case of Taymor Zazi, whose property had been designated as vacant following complications in obtaining permits for repairs. During a public hearing, Zazi argued that his property should not be classified as vacant, emphasizing recent efforts to stabilize the structure and refuting claims based on outdated images. He expressed frustration that the vacant building designation was issued shortly after he sought a permit, hampering his renovation plans. Zazi’s goal is to make the property suitable as a residence for his son.

Council members engaged with Zazi, seeking clarification on his renovation plans and the compliance issues at hand. Concerns were raised regarding the legitimacy of past plumbing work, which had not been updated since 2002. Ultimately, the council upheld the recommendation to maintain the property’s vacant status, requiring Zazi to secure necessary inspections and permits to address code compliance.

Apart from these individual property cases, the council moved forward with several legislative measures. They introduced ordinance 25-2, a significant amendment to the city charter allowing for administrative citations for ordinance violations, such as wage theft and unsafe housing conditions. This ordinance, lauded as a tool for enhancing equity and ordinance enforcement, was set for a second reading and public hearing on January 15.

Additionally, the council addressed rezoning applications related to McAllister College’s redevelopment plans, involving properties on Grand Avenue and Kelly Street. The rezoning aligns with the area’s development patterns, with support from local stakeholders. A public hearing on this item was scheduled for the following week.