Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Mayor Joe Hogsett’s administration is seeking a stronger approach to force property and business owners to discourage behavior that compromises public safety.
Lawyers for the city plan to test the Indiana state nuisance law by suing property owners who are the subject of repeated 911 calls, health code violations and other measurable concerns. The goal is to determine whether the courts will accept those criteria as valid in declaring a property a public nuisance, overturning earlier court precedence.
The primary focus of the lawsuits will be bars and event venues, as Hogsett looks to find more ways to curb gun crimes.
“If property owners with constant gun issues fail to respond with common-sense measures like adequate security and banning the possession of firearms, we will now seek to hold them liable under state nuisance law for their role in maintaining a threat to the public’s safety,” Hogsett said in May. The approach received little notice as part of his larger public safety agenda.
A 2017 law from the Republican-led Indiana Statehouse prevents municipalities from punishing property owners or tenants for calling 911 in a range of circumstances. A 2018 Indiana Court of Appeals interpretation went further by limiting local governments’ ability to use emergency calls as proof that a landlord is negligent.
City test cases would challenge that 2018 interpretation. The city was preparing to test the law in early 2022 against the owners of Lakeside Pointe at Nora, an apartment complex on College Avenue and East 91st Street that racked up 600-plus health code violations. But the property was sold before a deadline set by city officials to take legal action.
Now, several city agencies are meeting as part of a task force to create a formula and definition for nuisance properties, said Aryn Schounce, director of governmental affairs and strategic initiatives. Multiple “test cases” would determine where Indiana courts stand on different types of properties and businesses.
The formula would factor in police calls, Mayor’s Action Center service cases, fire incidents and health department cases. The city’s nuisance property definition could be complete as soon as late this summer, she said.
The vague definition of a “nuisance” in Indiana law means a court could interpret the language differently this time around, city officials say. The city’s own definition will be built partially on the creation of a baseline number of “normal” for these various uses of city resources.
In these cases, the city most likely would seek monetary damages for the cost of providing city services or a court order that property owners take remedial measures to stop the nuisance, a city spokesperson told IBJ in an email.
Hogsett’s mayoral opponent, Republican Jefferson Shreve, said his public safety plan calls for hiring more police officers to help deter both violent and property crimes at troublesome properties.
“I support efforts to turn the heat up on Indy property owners who knowingly and repeatedly allow nuisance properties to remain a hindrance to neighboring property owners,” Shreve said.
Democratic City-County Councilor Jared Evans said he has seen the city’s current efforts work sometimes. Currently, the city fines or sends written reprimands to negligent owners of hotels, bars and apartment complexes after trying to work with them to resolve problems.
At Westlake Apartments, 6000 West Lake Drive, the complex had an uptick in crime. The apartments already had a security booth at the entrance, so Evans just requested that they staff it. Security at the entrance then photographed license plates and asked nonresidents whom they came to visit.
But examples in the recent past also show some owners aren’t so willing to change their practices.
For nearly a decade, the city pushed for improvements at Towne & Terrace, a blighted and crime-plagued apartment complex at East 42nd Street and Post Road that was governed by a largely out-of-state homeowners association. The dilapidated complex provided a hub for drug dealing and created an unsafe environment for low-income residents.
Not much changed until the HOA filed for bankruptcy last year and became more willing to comply with city requests. In April, the city began demolishing structures at the property with an eye toward redevelopment.
Evans blamed the issue of negligent landlords partially on what some would call pro-landlord policies at the Indiana Statehouse. “There has been strong lobbying at the Statehouse by different interest groups to prevent the city from passing ordinances that would hold accountable bad actors,” Evans said. “Whether it’s apartment complexes, developers, owners, managers, things of that nature, we need to address that.”
He said he wants the city to take the issue “as far as we can go and just show bad actors that, ‘We’re gonna come after you.’”
Still, dealing with these properties requires a delicate balancing act, Evans said, since low-income Indianapolis residents often rely on long-term hotel stays and cheap apartments as permanent housing. If the city takes drastic measures to close these properties, it can leave hundreds homeless.
A task force involving several city-county agencies has been meeting since the end of 2022 to try to tackle the problem of nuisance properties.
The task force includes representatives from the county prosecutor’s office, the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, the Marion County Alcohol Task Force, the Marion County Public Health Department, the Indianapolis Department of Business and Neighborhood Services and the Indianapolis Office of Public Health and Safety.
Other city agencies and state partners are engaged on an as-needed basis, a city spokesperson told IBJ.
Increasingly, the focus for the city and the police department has been bars and event venues.
A recent investigation by The Indianapolis Star found that some state laws have tied local officials’ hands and made it difficult for them to deal with festering crime at bars.
An uptick in violence in Broad Ripple recently led bar owners in the area to take matters into their own hands by closing at 1 a.m.
Lt. William Carter, who leads IMPD’s nuisance abatement team, said illegal and unlicensed bars also are a problem, particularly near West 38th Street and Lafayette Road.
“When you’re illegal—operating illegally, anyway—you’re not going to follow those rules,” Carter said.
The city’s test-case approach aims to put teeth into the ways the city can deal with property owners harboring these businesses. It will be up to the courts to decide whether the city has the authority to proceed.
“We’re working on it, we’re getting it, but we want to get it as right as we possibly can before going full tilt with our identified properties,” Schounce said.•
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
There is an organization, Accelerate Indiana Municipalities (AIM, former known as the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns), which ought to be a part of Indianapolis’ effort. The vision of AIM is “to be nimble and proactive, (which) represents a collaborative mindset for working with legislators and a determination to facilitate open discussions between lawmakers and municipal leaders.” Inasmuch as Indianapolis is the economic engine of the state, all municipalities would benefit by supporting the Capital city.
And for their next act perhaps they could start enforcing the laws, prosecuting and locking up the bad guys instead of giving them an ankle bracelet and a order to be good.
The “they” you refer to are those in the criminal justice system – judges and prosecutors – which the mayor and city do not control. This is about civil action, and the unfortunate need for the city to have to file “test cases” instead of the General Assembly giving it the appropriate authority, tools, and funding.
and can we send you, Michael D., the bill for all the additional jail cells and jail staff that will be required with your “lock ’em up” philosophy? You’re good for it, right?
It’s problematic that citizens as voters favor this approach, but citizens as taxpayers don’t generally seem interested in paying the tax bills to pay for all of this. It extends across the breadth of public services: good roads, public education, parks, swimming pools, cleaner water and air…but little interest in the attendant tax increases.
Tim,
Yes! You lock up criminals. How is that problematic??
That’s what prosecutors are suppose to do. Not be social justice warriors.
I double that, Tim. So tired of people complaining about public services and demanding lower taxes at the same time. No feasible solutions, just complaints.
Greg,
Agreed that feasible and sensible solutions should be found.
Unfortunately, no one has it all figured out just yet.
But some things are very self evident.
High crime drives away people, businesses, and any future investments.
Leaving an ever shrinking tax base.
How does that help anyone??
Keith:
Some basic truths:
Marion County’s assessed property valuation has never been higher.
Private investment in capital projects has never been higher.
Unemployment has not been this low, at a sustained level, in the history of those numbers being recorded.
Prosecutors don’t sentence criminals. Judges do. And to that point: Indiana’s prisons are overpopulated and bursting at the seems. So much so that we’re spending $1.3 billion on a prison expansion at Westville.
Nothing’s ever as simple as you paint it. If only it were….
Tim would rather NOT enforce laws and incarcerate criminals, because evidently, that costs too much. You know what else costs money, Tim? Crime and it’s effects on communities and businesses.