Relating to abandoned structures and abatement of public nuisances. Effective 7-1-19

Responsible building official is defined in the bill. The bill allows the responsible building inspector to make an application to the court for an administrative warrant if necessary to conduct an inspection of a building. The term “building” currently includes buildings and structures only.26. Current law relies on the current definition of “abandoned” to start the clock for when a person may file a petition for abatement. A hearing is required to determine if the building is abandoned or is a public nuisance. Currently, a petitioner must make service on the building owner in one of three methods. The bill requires a property to remain vacant for at least 135 days before a person may file a petition for abatement. The bill does not allow for a personal judgment against any party and requires the petition to be solely against the interested persons’ interest in the property. The bill includes additional methods of service. The bill allows a responsible building official’s written inspection report to be accepted as evidence in an evidentiary hearing or motion in a proceeding under Code chapter 657A under certain circumstances.10. A property cannot be claimed as homestead, and a mortgagor, or successor in interest of record, cannot reject a nonjudicial foreclosure written notice served on the mortgagor, or successor in interest, after such date. Current law allows an owner to collect reasonable attorney fees actually incurred from a petitioner if the court finds that the building in question is not abandoned or a public nuisance.1A. Current law requires the court to conduct a hearing to offer mortgagees of record, lienholders of record, or other known interested persons the opportunity to abate a public nuisance. The bill eliminates such hearing and creates a new process for interested persons to demonstrate their intent and ability to abate the nuisance and act as a receiver. If the building is a historic building or located in a historic district, the court shall give preference to an economically feasible rehabilitation plan that preserves the historical nature of the building. Current law allows a court to empower a receiver to issue notes and secure the notes by mortgage bearing interest at the statutory rate and any terms and conditions approved by the court. The bill allows the court to provide for a higher interest rate. If the receiver contemplates a transfer of the note and mortgage, at the time that the receiver seeks court authorization of the contemplated transfer, the receiver must disclose to the mortgagee the contemplated transfer in the receiver’s application for approval of the mortgage. The bill provides immunity from liability for a receiver acting in good faith to fulfill the receiver’s court-appointed duties. The bill makes an interested party responsible for paying the mortgagee’s reasonable costs and attorney fees if the interested party pays off the receiver’s mortgage loan. The bill requires a receiver to pay a plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees in most situations, but provides that a neighboring landowner who pursued an action in bad faith may be liable for attorney fees. The court may bar such landowner from filing further actions under Code chapter 657A.10 shall only apply to cities and counties that adopt such by ordinance.10B, and to correct internal Code references as necessary.