Vote on minimal property maintenance code standards likely for September

At an August 20 work session the Front Royal Town Council revisited what to do with its new municipal authority on forcing action on derelict and deteriorating structures.  At issue, as it was at a July 16 work session, was whether to use its new State-enabled authority to revisit installing broader property maintenance standards.

And again as it had been on July 16 and in 2017 when council backed away from establishing a property maintenance code or rental inspection district, cost remained a dividing line in the council “sand”.

A mayoral polling indicated a thin 3-2 majority in favor of the option described as the “same as doing nothing” by one council critic.  Council’s sixth member, John Connolly, continued to support the “do nothing” Option A – described as “No change” in the staff agenda summary.

Round 2, or is it Round 10 Vice-Mayor Eugene Tewalt and Councilman Jacob Meza continue to not be eye-to-eye on proceeding on property maintenance enforcement.

Vice-Mayor Eugene Tewalt and Councilmen William Sealock and Gary Gillespie favored Option B – limiting enforcement to “unsafe structures which can already be enforced by the public nuisance code” as staff noted in the agenda summary.

Councilmen Chris Morrison and Jacob Meza supported Option C – “adoption of a Property Maintenance Code without a Rental Inspection Program.”

The rental inspection aspect of a new town property maintenance code has been cited as the most costly aspect of a new program in requiring a “higher staffing level” for enforcement.

An annual cost estimate of $150,000 added to the town budget has been cited for this full enforcement program.

And if one supporter of the slightly broader enforcement Option C – Meza – expressed frustration with the speed at which things seem to work in establishing changes to town programs; others – particularly Vice-Mayor Tewalt – expressed frustration at a continued reliance on the Town’s General Fund reserves to pay for new, non-revenue-generating programs.

Following discussion of the procedural readdressing of a new vote related to property maintenance code standards rejected last year, it appeared a new vote on establishing either Option B or Option C into its enforcement apparatus would not come before the second meeting of September.

To enforce or not to enforce – taking ‘baby steps’ forward – Royal Examiner File Photos

See the Royal Examiner video for further detail on the debate and the logistics of reaching a new vote targeting added enforcement authority for at least derelict or unsafe structures enabled by last year’s State General Assembly approval of a change to the Town Charter:

Download Work Session Agenda – click here