GUSTINE – The city is moving forward with plans to put some teeth into its code enforcement practices that would hit violators squarely in the pocketbook.

Police Chief Devon Stavrowsky said staff is proposing a code amendment which would allow the city to issue administrative citations and levy fines rather than relying on the more time-consuming and expensive abatement process and criminal citations it now utilizes.

The City Council has reviewed the proposal, which will be brought back for formal action.

Stavrowsky said he is anticipating council approval, and said he hopes to have the new system in place before summer’s end.

Currently, those responsible for public nuisances such as overgrown weeds, rubbish or abandoned vehicles are subject to a lengthy abatement process which includes council approval before the city can move in to correct a problem.

While a lien can be imposed to cover the city’s cost, no other fines are applied.

That would change with an administrative citation.

People responsible for violations would be given time to correct the situation, as they are now, Stavrowsky said, but would then be issued a civil citation and fined if they do not comply.

Though not formally established, the fines are proposed to start at $75.

The city would still have the authority to correct the problem itself if need be.

“We would be able to abate more quickly, more efficiently and at less cost to the city,” Stavrowsky explained.

Typically, he pointed out, the civil approach and administrative citations result in a short-term influx of cash to the city as fines are levied. But in the long term, the revenues decline as fewer violations occur.

“There is usually an income stream which transitions into compliance. You either have income coming in from enforcement and fines, or you get compliance,” the police chief commented. “Ideally you get substantial compliance, with just enough income coming in so that enforcement is not coming out of the taxpayer pocket.”

The idea, he stressed, is that those responsible for code violations foot the bill for the city’s cost of having to address the problem.

“The code enforcement is not a cash cow. It just shifts the cost of the enforcement to the offender,” Stavrowsky explained. “Right now taxpayers are picking up the cost of the enforcement.”

Some violations, such as parking an unregistered vehicle on the street, will draw an immediate citation.

Currently, those matters are heard in court and the city gets only a small portion of whatever fine is handed out.

Under a civil approach, the city would keep the fine money and avoid the court system and its associated fees.

Citations can be appealed to a five-person board, Stavrowsky noted. If the appellant does not agree with the outcome of the hearing, a second appeal can be heard in Superior Court.

The city would retain the ability to address a situation criminally rather than civilly if warranted, Stavrowsky added.

A public hearing on the proposed changes is set for June 17.