|
Building Bridges - Volume II, Number 4, 2003
Abandoned But Not Forgotten:
Baltimore’s Approach to Vacant Buildings
In Baltimore City, Maryland, vacant and abandoned buildings are the number one neighborhood quality of life issue that municipal code enforcement is called upon to address. Abandoned properties attract drug users and dealers, prostitutes, squatters, fires, trash and rats, and cause damage to adjacent properties. In a short time, the “domino effect” leads to additional blight on the block. Recognizing that no single agency has all the available resources needed to resolve this problem, Baltimore, through its Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) Code Enforcement Legal Section, has implemented a unique team approach to address its vacant and abandoned building dilemma.
At present, there are approximately 24,000 outstanding code violation notices in Baltimore City, of which over 14,000 are for vacant and abandoned buildings. These vacant buildings are more than a blighting influence; they are a threat to the health and safety of residents. Moreover, Baltimore has an extraordinary problem with drug addiction and drug distribution, which often involve hoards of addicts being served on the street, often from abandoned homes. Amidst these difficult circumstances communities and community leaders are looking for help. The Department of Housing and Community Development’s Code Enforcement Legal Section is uniquely poised to address these problems.
The primary responsibility for enforcing the housing, building, zoning and related codes of Baltimore City lies with the Housing Inspection Services Division of DHCD. When violators fail to comply voluntarily with the notices issued by those inspectors, the matter is referred to Housing Inspections’ Compliance Section for attorney review by the Code Enforcement Legal Section. Each of the section’s nine attorneys is assigned geographically to one of the nine Housing Inspection Services (HIS) area offices. Housing Inspection districts are coterminous with the nine police districts in Baltimore City. Failure to comply with Baltimore’s Building, Fire and Related Codes may result in criminal misdemeanor charges and/or a civil injunction.
The Legal Section takes a community-oriented approach towards identifying and prioritizing quality of life issues. Towards this end, each attorney is in regular contact with community leaders in his or her district. Moreover, for maximum effectiveness, Legal Section attorneys have established partnerships with the police department, the State’s Attorney’s Office, DHCD’s Housing Inspection Services Division, and the many not-for-profit community development corporations throughout the city.
In order to best serve the community, the Legal Section has worked to institutionalize a set of best practices to maximize outcomes. Identifying and obtaining the information necessary to locate current property owners was critical to the success of this endeavor. Valuable time and resources were being wasted pursuing deceased or incorrectly identified property owners. Together, Housing Inspection Services and the Legal Section developed not only the resources, but also the step-by-step procedures for housing inspectors to follow in order to locate owners and document their contacts. Contact with the proper parties often allows for the violation to be resolved in the field office. Accordingly, legal resources are reserved for those matters truly requiring litigation.
Another key reform initiated by the Legal Section was the development of a database to track all code enforcement litigation and to monitor results. The Case Tracking Database also writes a host of reports that permit data management on a scale previously unimaginable. The database prints the docket sheets that the attorneys take to court, eliminating a labor-intensive clerical task that once bogged down staff. These daily docket sheets are currently faxed citywide to interested community organizations. Within DHCD, every division now has access to the Case Tracking Database. For DHCD, this means data sharing, via their Intranet, in a manner presently unsurpassed by any other division. Data sharing and availability promotes informed decision making agency-wide.
DHCD will soon have in place large portions of the Case Tracking Database on the world wide web. At last, concerned citizens will be able to easily track the outcome of any case forwarded for prosecution. DHCD expects to see even better outcomes as community members themselves monitor compliance with court-ordered deadlines via the internet. Additionally, DHCD expects that world wide web access to the Housing Court Dockets will promote greater community participation in court.
Finally, using Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping resources, DHCD identified and prioritized every vacant and abandoned building in Baltimore City. Each vacant building was then reviewed in an environment of relevant context data and a plan for enforcement for each district was developed. As a result, DHCD is now on course to prosecute the owners of every vacant building in the city where it makes sense to do so, and in the process separate out those vacant buildings that are not susceptible to a code enforcement solution. Moreover, in the course of this project DHCD has identified every vacant building in the city where demolition is the practical solution.
For more information about identifying and prioritizing the vacant and abandoned buildings in Baltimore, including the Case Tracking Database and GIS mapping resources, please contact Michael Braverman, Director, Code Enforcement Legal Section, at 410-396-4140 or email him at michael.braverman@baltimorecity.gov.
APRI hosts 2nd National Community Prosecution Conference
With support from the Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, APRI once again hosted the National Community Prosecution Conference on April 13-16, 2003. This conference brought together approximately 250 state and local prosecutors, city attorneys, police officials, community representatives and other allied professionals from across the country and internationally, including prosecutors from Sweden and Japan. This year’s theme emphasized the role of prosecutors as leaders in public safety and celebrated the successes of the community prosecution movement over the past decade. The American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI) also recognized three individuals who have made significant contributions to the national community prosecution movement over the past ten years: District Attorney Michael Schrunk, Portland, OR; District Attorney William Ritter, Denver, CO; and Charles M. “Bud” Hollis, Senior Policy Advisor for Adjudication, Bureau of Justice Assistance.
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Trespass-Exclusion Policy
Community prosecutors across the country increasingly use neighborhood access restrictions to combat crimes such as drug dealing and prostitution. In a recent landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld these restrictions.
In Virginia v. Hicks,1 the Court examined the constitutionality of a trespass-exclusion policy implemented by the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA). The written trespass-exclusion policy allowed the RRHA property manager to bar persons who could not “demonstrate a legitimate business or social purpose” for being on the premises. The property covered by the policy included streets and sidewalks that had been conveyed by the City of Richmond to the local Housing Authority. The “no trespass” policy was enacted to curtail the “open air drug market” plaguing the community.
The defendant was arrested when he was found to be in an area in which he had prior knowledge that he was prohibited from entering due to past incidents, including criminal activity. The defendant was subsequently convicted of trespass. He appealed, arguing that the trespass-exclusion policy was vague, overly broad and violated his rights to free speech and association under the United States Constitution. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled against the practice, finding that it vested RRHA with “broad and unfettered discretion” to regulate speech protected by the U.S. Constitution.
In the 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the right of local government to enforce laws reflecting “legitimate state interests in maintaining comprehensive controls over harmful, constitutionally unprotected conduct.” In this case, the Court found that neither the basis for the sanction (the prior criminal conduct) nor its purpose (preventing future trespasses) implicated the First Amendment. As the defendant was not engaged in constitutionally protected conduct when he was arrested and failed to demonstrate that anyone engaged in constitutionally protected speech would be barred, the Court decided that this case presented no “chilling effect” on protected speech.
With this ruling, trespass-exclusion policies are likely to continue to be used as tools by community prosecutors in combating criminal activity in their neighborhoods. For more information on effective community prosecution techniques, please contact the National Center for Community Prosecution at 703-549-4253.
1 Virginia v. Hicks, No. 02-371. Argued April 30, 2003—Decided June 16, 2003; Commonwealth of Virginia v. Kevin Lamont Hicks, 264 Va. 48; 563 S.E.2d 674 2002 Va. LEXIS 71, June 7, 2002, Decided.
News in Our Community
International Site Visits
Japan
During the week of March 10, 2003, Michael Kuykendall, Director, National Center for Community Prosecution, traveled to Tokyo, Japan at the request of the Japanese Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and the Japanese Embassy in Washington, DC. While there, he met with Prosecutor General Akio Harada and his top staff, presented lectures to MOJ officials, and attended meetings to answer questions from Public Prosecutors about community prosecution.
Sweden
Michael Kuykendall has been invited to travel to Sweden August 28-29, 2003 to meet with the Prosecutor General and participate in a seminar for Sweden’s newly designated community prosecutors. Sweden is implementing community prosecution country wide and towards that end has designated 20 attorneys as community prosecutors.
Thank You, Roya Hanna
APRI would like to thank Roya Hanna for her great work at the National Center for Community Prosecution during her 2+ years as Staff Attorney. She has been a vibrant and dynamic member of our staff always ready to assist in whatever task needed to be completed. Because she traveled to all of APRI’s community prosecution trainings over the past two years, she gained tremendous knowledge and insight into community prosecution and was able to meet with many community prosecutors across the country. Through this network, she helped to connect many jurisdictions experiencing similar problems with one another. Although we are sad to see her leave, we are pleased that she has accepted an Assistant State’s Attorney position at the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office in Baltimore, Maryland, effective May 27, 2003. FYI, Roya won her first trial on robbery charges on June 12th. Way to go!
Staffing News
Levina Kim has joined the National Center for Community Prosecution as Program Assistant effective June 4, 2003. She has worked at APRI since February 2002 as Program Assistant for the Gun Violence Prosecution Unit. We are excited to have Levina join our staff.
|
