Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Legal Services

TO:	Toni Ramirez Wheeler, Director of Legal Services
FROM:	Scott J. Miller, Staff Attorney
Date:	May 12, 2009
RE:	Ordinance -  Weed Abatement

One of the projects undertaken by the Legal Department this year is the creation of procedural checklists for Planning and Developmental Services for many of the activities they are called upon to perform.  I was directed to create the checklist for our weed ordinance, Article 3 of Chapter XVIII of the City Code.  

During my review of that ordinance, I determined that it could be improved by amending a pair of sections to more clearly delineate what is required in terms of notice, and also what procedure is followed in an enforcement action.  While the substance of the provisions is left unchanged, the attached ordinance does better clarify the notice requirements, enforcement procedures and consequences of noncompliance with that article of the City Code. 

In addition, once it became clear that work would be done on those portions of the City Code, Developmental Services was asked to weigh in with any comments that it had regarding the current law.  Only one area of the current law was identified for amendment.

For nonresident owners, the current ordinance requires notice by publication before abatement can be commenced.  Publication is an expensive proposition, as an average notice under this article of the City Code costs $68.00.  This is significantly more than the notification costs for resident owners or occupants, as notification of these people can be accomplished by certified mail, costing only $5.40 per notice.  The amount spent on the publications of notices is not inconsequential.  In 2007, approximately $5800 was spent to publish these notices, and in 2008 the amount was again more than $5000.  If these notices had been served by certified mail instead of publication, the cost would have been less than $500. 

The notice provisions in our current ordinances are taken directly from the Kansas Statutes, specifically K.S.A. 12-1617f.  The statute does not foreclose local modifications, however, as K.S.A. 12-1617f(b) states that:

In lieu of giving notice as provided by subsection (a), a city may give notice as provided by this subsection. The governing body shall adopt an ordinance which states its weed removal policy and notification procedure. Such procedure shall provide for a minimum one-time yearly written notification by mail or personal service to the owner, occupant or agent. Such notice shall include the same information required by subsection (a). In addition, such notice shall include a statement that no further notice shall be given prior to removal of weeds.

The City of Lawrence may, then, adopt its own notification policy provided the policy meets the minimum requirement of due process.  Providing notice by certified mail to nonresident, when the owner of a property is know, should be sufficient to meet that requirement just as it is in the case of residents.  Therefore, the proposed ordinance changes the method of serving nonresidents by specifying service by certified mail.  It would still allow publication notice for any property whose owner is unknown, but because the owners of virtually all properties are registered in the register of deeds office, the need for publication should be significantly curtailed, saving the City thousands of dollars in publication costs.

For these reasons, I recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance.  If I may be of further assistance, please call on me.