Contrary to Building Commissioner Ron Hartman's assertions, the city need not hire a detective agency to track down owners of dilapidated properties. Notification of building repair orders via the local newspaper is allowed under Indiana law when a letter to an owner's last known address is returned as undeliverable. In fact, the state suggests that notice publication take place simultaneously with snail mail for "administrative convenience", just in case it's returned.
The law even says that failure to record an ownership interest or to provide the building commissioner's office with contact information in the absence of that recording is considered consent for corrective action and a relinquishment of any legal claims concerning notice.
Here's the New Albany law:
150.103 ENFORCEMENT; SERVICE OF NOTICES AND ORDERS; HEARINGS.
(A) Whenever the Health Officer or the Building Commissioner determines that there are reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a violation of any provision of this subchapter or of any rule or regulation adopted pursuant thereto, he shall give notice of such violation to the person or persons responsible therefor, as herein provided. Such notice shall:
(1) Be in writing,
(2) Include a list of the violations found,
(3) Allow a reasonable time for the performance of any act it requires, and
(4) Be served upon the owner or his agent, or the occupant as the case may require; provided that such notice shall be deemed to be properly served upon such owner or agent or upon such occupant if a copy thereof is served upon him personally, if a copy thereof is sent by registered mail to his last known address, or if service is effected by any other method authorized under the laws of this state.
Which laws of the state apply? I'm pretty sure this part of Indiana's unsafe building law does:
IC 36-7-9-25
Manner of serving notice
Sec. 25. (a) Notice of orders, notice of continued hearings without a specified date, notice of a statement that public bids are to be let, and notice of claims for payment must be given by:
(1) sending a copy of the order or statement by registered or certified mail to the residence or place of business or employment of the person to be notified, with return receipt requested;
(2) delivering a copy of the order or statement personally to the person to be notified;
(3) leaving a copy of the order or statement at the dwelling or usual place of abode of the person to be notified and sending by first class mail a copy of the order or statement to the last known address of the person to be notified; or
(4) sending a copy of the order or statement by first class mail to the last known address of the person to be notified.
If a notice described in subdivision (1) is returned undelivered, a copy of the order or statement must be given in accordance with subdivision (2), (3), or (4).
(b) If service is not obtained by a means described in subsection (a) and the hearing authority concludes that a reasonable effort has been made to obtain service, service may be made by publishing a notice of the order or statement in accordance with IC 5-3-1 in the county where the unsafe premises are located. However, publication may be made on consecutive days. If service of an order is made by publication, the publication must include the information required by subdivisions (1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), and (9) of section 5(b) of this
chapter, and must also include a statement indicating generally what action is required by the order and that the exact terms of the order may be obtained from the enforcement authority. The hearing authority may make a determination about whether a reasonable effort has been made to obtain service by the means described in subsection (a) on the basis of information provided by the department (or, in the case of a consolidated city, the enforcement authority). The hearing authority is not required to make the determination at a hearing. The hearing authority must make the determination in writing.
(c) When service is made by any of the means described in this section, except by mailing or by publication, the person making service must make an affidavit stating that the person has made the service, the manner in which service was made, to whom the order or statement was issued, the nature of the order or statement, and the date of service. The affidavit must be placed on file with the enforcement authority.
(d) The date when notice of the order or statement is considered given is as follows:
(1) If the order or statement is delivered personally or left at the dwelling or usual place of abode, notice is considered given on the day when the order or statement is delivered to the person or left at the person's dwelling or usual place of abode.
(2) If the order or statement is mailed, notice is considered given on the date shown on the return receipt, or, if no date is shown, on the date when the return receipt is received by the enforcement authority.
(3) Notice by publication is considered given on the date of the second day that publication was made.
(e) A person with a property interest in an unsafe premises who does not:
(1) record an instrument reflecting the interest in the recorder's office of the county where the unsafe premises is located; or
(2) if an instrument reflecting the interest is not recorded, provide to the department (or, in the case of a consolidated city, the enforcement authority) in writing the person's name and address and the location of the unsafe premises;
is considered to consent to reasonable action taken under this chapter for which notice would be required and relinquish a claim to notice under this chapter.
(f) The department (or, in the case of a consolidated city, the enforcement authority) may, for the sake of administrative convenience, publish notice under subsection (b) at the same time notice is attempted under subsection (a). If published notice is given as described in subsection (b), the hearing authority shall subsequently make a determination about whether a reasonable effort has been made to obtain service by the means described in subsection (a).
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.309, SEC.28. Amended by Acts 1981, P.L.45, SEC.27; P.L.59-1986, SEC.15; P.L.169-2006, SEC.69;
P.L.194-2007, SEC.12.
Indiana's unsafe building law is available here. I'm keen on further exploring the section relative to court ordered receivership as a means of dealing with problematic properties myself.
Are we to assume Mr. Hartman hasn't read that bit, either?
Great Info Bluegill!
ReplyDelete"Are we to assume Mr. Hartman hasn't read that bit, either?" Bluegill
ReplyDeleteOK - How often do any of us read through legal code? I'm a researcher by trade, and anytime I have to read legal code it hurts. Not that I don't when I really want to know the law, nor should appointed or elected government officials.
Still, the laws aren't written so ordinary citizens can make sense of them. I think that's a problem with our legal system. As such every town/city I've lived in ends up being "corrupted" by a small group of lawyers, who read and manipulate the laws, cause that's all they do.
This situation leaves us ordinary citizens at a disadvantage, but I applaud your work in this regard Bluegill.
Unfortunately we have a city that has been run by people, many with like a high school education, who not only disparage learning, but flaunt their own ignorance. As if playing their hand to the lawyers who stand ready to take advantage.
Our only foundation upon which to demand change are constitutional rights and the laws on the books. Maybe we could make these portions of the Indiana code that apply to housing into easy to understand picto-grams for distribution at the next council meeting.
Not taking up for Mr. Hartman, but perhaps he doesn't need to read and attempt to comprehend them.
ReplyDeleteGoing with Gina's point, maybe Mr. Hartman needs to ask the city attorney more questions. "I'm having problems with (blank). What are our options to deal with this, from a statutory point of view?"
Your are correct, bluegill. SOMEONE in authority needs to read them.
Our city attorney has indeed been conspicuously absent from legal discussions concerning code enforcement.
ReplyDeleteIt'd be interesting to know why. Perhaps he's too busy denying legal services to other governmental entities.
I'd feel differently about the building commissioner's office if Mr. Hartman had at least pointed out the law and asked for help as part of recent discussions. As is, he acts like he has no idea where to start.
Finding that starting point took about twenty minutes, not two years.
Still, the laws aren't written so ordinary citizens can make sense of them.
ReplyDeleteAnd medical textbooks aren't either.
A sophisticated society requires a sophisticated legal code. If all of the lawyers and judges quit tomorrow, then the only other recourse to solve disputes would be an AK-47.
The problem in New Albany isn't a secret cabal of corrupt lawyers. It's a lack of leadership.
"...an AK-47."
ReplyDeleteWe do have one alternative. Dr. Dan could serve as arbitrator in all conflicts. Have you ever seen him admit to being wrong? Or even just a little bit "not right"?