City planning staff asked the council to increase nuisance abatement funding and clarified where demo and abatement expenses have been recorded in the budget.
Casey Barnes, who presented nuisance/housing items, said the biggest change requested is a $20,000 increase to nuisance labor (line 6380) because cleanup and contractor demand are unpredictable. She described the city’s practice of using multiple subcontractors (three to four mowers/contractors) who supply their own equipment for abatement and mowing tasks.
Pam and other staff explained that prior-year budget spikes (a $280,000 line) resulted from combining demolition and nuisance in one professional-services account; separating the two lines this year produced a more consistent $80,000 trend in actual spending for nuisance. Casey noted vacant-property registration generates roughly $6,000 per year and building-permit/permit fees across planning and zoning are budgeted at roughly $52,000.
Staff said the city typically recovers only a fraction of abatement costs through special assessments and that fund 160 (economic development fund) has about $43,000 available and will transfer $80,000 to cover a SID center deficit in the coming year. Councilors asked whether nuisance work is done with city equipment (answer: private contractors provide their own mowers).
Next steps: staff will track actual abatement demand and return with requests if demolition or nuisance workloads exceed the newly proposed baseline.