Looked to see if there was already a thread on this and didn't see one. If there is, please merge.

I noticed several weeks back some graffiti on the front. Didn't notice any today so it must've been covered up. But I can see this becoming a back and forth battle. It's never a good sign when an abandoned structure starts getting graffitied. Any word on what will become of this.

And this also brings up another question. When a business moves out, can a municipality compel the owner of the building to keep it in good shape? Over the years, I've noticed some long abandoned buildings in Edmond begin to look ragged, overgrown, and not well kept. There was a restaurant on south Broadway (which I believe has since been torn down), the old rib crib on Broadway as well as a few others I can't think of off thr top of my head that set empty for years and started to look bad.

Looked to see if there was already a thread on this and didn't see one. If there is, please merge.

I noticed several weeks back some graffiti on the front. Didn't notice any today so it must've been covered up. But I can see this becoming a back and forth battle. It's never a good sign when an abandoned structure starts getting graffitied. Any word on what will become of this.

And this also brings up another question. When a business moves out, can a municipality compel the owner of the building to keep it in good shape? Over the years, I've noticed some long abandoned buildings in Edmond begin to look ragged, overgrown, and not well kept. There was a restaurant on south Broadway (which I believe has since been torn down), the old rib crib on Broadway as well as a few others I can't think of off thr top of my head that set empty for years and started to look bad.

Don't think so. I recall that, a couple years ago, our "Lincoln Lawmakers" enacted legislation that actually makes it harder for cities to compel property upkeep. It was infringing on property owners liberties, or somesuch.

Don't think so. I recall that, a couple years ago, our "Lincoln Lawmakers" enacted legislation that actually makes it harder for cities to compel property upkeep. It was infringing on property owners liberties, or somesuch.

Link?

Link?

Afraid not. I'm too lazy to learn how to do that. google something like "Oklahoma legislature restricting municipal code laws".

If that is the case, it sounds like the code enforcement department for OKC needs a revamp. Between dilapidated structures, which are a liability issue, jungle weeds growing through the concrete in OKC and visual pollution like graffiti and trash, OKC needs to have more pride! Positive impressions are important for outsiders.

You can contact the action center and report graffiti and then once the city person goes out and gives notice they have a duration of time to have it removed.

https://library.municode.com/ok/oklahoma_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=OKMUCO2020_CH35NU_ARTVGR

OKC can cite property owners for graffiti, high weeds/grass and unsecured buildings, AFAIK. But, what they can do beyond that as it relates to performance, I don't know for sure. Used to be the city could take action after several citations and place a lien on the property deed.

I don't think the city can take the property, based on those types of violations.

On a side note, I think that Gold's property has a solid ownership group and should be well maintained until they get a new tenant.

Afraid not. I'm too lazy to learn how to do that. google something like "Oklahoma legislature restricting municipal code laws".

No help there. I found a nearly 700 page document that I'm not reading. The search had several returns that all appeared to be the same thing.

If you have access to the law, simply copy the url and paste it in your post. Takes a couple of seconds.

OKC can cite property owners for graffiti, high weeds/grass and unsecured buildings, AFAIK. But, what they can do beyond that as it relates to performance, I don't know for sure. Used to be the city could take action after several citations and place a lien on the property deed.

I don't think the city can take the property, based on those types of violations.

On a side note, I think that Gold's property has a solid ownership group and should be well maintained until they get a new tenant.
They can cite them and then remedy the problem by mowing or removing the graffiti etc. They will then place a lien on the property for the work they did to remedy the problem.