Housing-lien proposal would strike an eight-year payment option from city code

An Atlanta proposal would delete housing-code rules allowing property owners to spread city closing and demolition bills over several years—including an option giving qualifying owners up to eight years to pay.⁠[1]

Ordinance 26-O-1648 appears under first readings in the Finance/Executive Committee’s draft November 10 minutes. The agenda packet’s workflow lists a pending City Council step for December 7. Those listings establish a proposal, not an enacted collection policy.⁠[1][2]

The redline would replace Housing Code Section 38—the procedures for collecting amounts due on a lien—with “Reserved.” Among the provisions crossed out is a repayment route allowing owners to pay 25% within 30 days after the lien is perfected, then the balance in three equal annual payments with 10% annual interest.⁠[1]

It would also remove authority in that section for the chief financial officer to permit deferred or installment payments when owners’ financial circumstances warrant relief. That provision covers city work to clean and close vacant structures, demolish structures or secure private property. Its repayment schedule ranges from up to two years for charges of $1,000 or less to up to eight years for charges of $5,001 or more.⁠[1]

Those longer terms come with substantial conditions. The language marked for deletion requires proof that owners cannot obtain other financing, a promissory note carrying 12% annual interest, a property security deed and a waiver of judicial and quasi-judicial remedies normally available to owners. The debt becomes payable sooner if the property is sold or its title transferred.⁠[1]

Section 38 would be left marked “Reserved,” not given a replacement repayment schedule. Whether owners could obtain comparable payment arrangements under other city authority is not established by this ordinance.⁠[1]

Separately, the proposal would expressly include interest and penalties in judicial housing-code liens for closing or demolition costs. They would run from the final determination of costs, using the same amounts applicable to unpaid real-property taxes in the county where the property is located. The draft describes that addition as a clarification consistent with state law.⁠[1]