When East Baton Rouge Parish’s litter court was established in August 2009, Mayor Kip declared “an all-out war” on unsightly yards and dirty swimming pools.
Nearly two years later, as Holden’s administrative team begins looking at several ways to improve the court’s effectiveness, the mayor sounds as if he has bigger battles on his mind.
Asked if the parish is winning the war on litter, Holden says, “I really don’t know. I can’t speak to that because I don’t micromanage litter court or keep tabs on it day to day. You’d have to ask the people overseeing it.”
Among the people with that responsibility is Assistant Chief Administrative Officer William Daniel, who also is acting director of the Department of Public Works, which oversees property maintenance code enforcement and litter court.
From the litter court’s inception two years ago through April 20, 2011, Daniel says, 2,482 of the 3,535 notices issued to negligent property owners have been dismissed. Most dismissals result from the owner’s correcting whatever issue is addressed in the notice, typically a debris-filled yard, overgrown lot, neglected garbage bin or an unfenced swimming pool, to avoid facing a $117 fine and a $50 court fee, he says.
But asked about Holden’s declaration, Daniel gives a mixed report from the front line.
“We’re waging the war,” he says. “We just didn’t realize early on that it was going to be Iraq. We’re just going to have to get better at waging the war, and we have plans to do that.”
Daniel wants the four code enforcement offices designated to litter court outfitted with smartphones in order to upload photos of trash-filled yards and dumpsites directly to a website that would act as a “wall of shame” for the community to see.
“If we could automate the whole process, that would allow me to get some more resources into the field and in complaint resolution, which would be a big help as far as the overall efficiency of litter court goes,” Daniel says.
Any changes to litter court need Metro Council approval, he says, and that won’t happen until next year, when the city-parish’s contract with American Traffic Solutions expires. Since the court’s inception, ATS has been compiling and storing images of neglected properties, taken by city-parish code enforcement officers, as well as issuing notices and collecting fines.
The Scottsdale, Ariz.-based company, which also contracts with the city-parish for its traffic cameras, was paid $7,700 per month for its services during litter court’s first six months, and has received $5,500 each month since, for a total of $134,200 through April.
ATS spokesman Charles Territo says the company is interested in renewing the litter court contract, but didn’t elaborate. ATS appears willing to negotiate a lower price, Daniel says, adding that discussions are still in the early stages.
“I’m waiting to hear back from ATS on exactly what their proposal is going to be, and based on what their response is I’m going to start looking at where I can get the money to develop what I want to do,” Daniel says. “It’s also possible ATS could develop it.”
The cost of litter court doesn’t begin and end with ATS. There also are salaries and benefits for the judge, code enforcement officers and complaint resolution staffers. Daniel says he doesn’t have a total of costs dedicated to the court.
But whatever the amount, it’s not offset by the fines collected by the court. Of the 1,016 citations that have been issued, just 104—about 10%—have been paid.
“It’s a loser,” says Metro Council member Chandler Loupe, who requested the report on litter court that Daniel shared with the council on April 27. “It’s costing us a lot of money, and I haven’t really seen an improvement. So I think it’s time to fish or cut bait.”
The city-parish has had trouble collecting unpaid fines, Daniel says, because they were placed as liens on the property. Under such an arrangement, the city-parish wouldn’t get paid unless the offender sold his or her property. Unpaid fines now are tacked onto property taxes, Daniel says, so collections should rise this year.
“I don’t think the program will ever break even, let alone make money, but that’s not the object,” Daniel says. “The object is to get these unsightly properties cleaned up. It’s been pretty successful thus far, and I’m very confident that we’re going to become way more efficient.”
Loupe says Daniel has been “doing a great job so far,” adding he’s confident litter court can become more efficient under Daniel’s leadership. One of the first problems that should be addressed, Loupe says, is a loophole in the process that allows some residents to illegally place signs throughout the parish.
“We had one gentleman who would put up illegal signs, get an extension after the first notice was sent, and then take the signs down the day before the extension was up,” Loupe says. “I mean, this went on for six months or more.”
Loupe says he supports a clean city and holding accountable residents who refuse to keep their properties tidy and their swimming pools securely fenced, but at what cost?
“I don’t think we’ve been at it long enough to know at what cost yet,” Mayor Pro Tem Mike Walker says. “I would support an effort to go at it even stronger, because there is still too much litter and blight. We’re just beginning, and we need to go at it stronger. A lot stronger.”
