Louisiana House Bill HB335

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/14/11
• Refer: 5/3/11
• Report Pass: 6/6/11
• Engrossed: 6/13/11
• Report Pass: 6/19/11
• Enrolled: 6/20/11
• Chaptered: 6/28/11
• Passed: 6/28/11

Caption

Provides relative to property sold at tax sales in the city of New Orleans

Impact

The enactment of HB 335 would significantly alter state laws concerning the management and rehabilitation of abandoned or blighted properties in New Orleans. It compels anyone redeeming such properties to reimburse for improvements that ensure compliance with local ordinances. This creates a financial responsibility for property redeemers, which could encourage better oversight of properties that have fallen into disrepair while also incentivizing tax sale purchasers to invest in property rehabilitation.

Summary

House Bill 335 focuses on improving the process related to property sold at tax sales in the city of New Orleans. The bill mandates that property purchasers at tax sales, who make improvements to previously abandoned or blighted properties, are entitled to reimbursement from the property redeemer for the costs of such improvements. The provided reimbursement amounts are capped at fifteen hundred dollars for abandoned properties and three thousand dollars for blighted properties, promoting the restoration and compliance of such properties with municipal codes.

Sentiment

General sentiment towards HB 335 appears to be supportive among those who see the potential for revitalization of blighted neighborhoods. Advocates argue that it incentivizes private investment in public good and ensures that properties sold under tax law don't remain neglected. However, there may also be concerns raised by those wary of added financial burdens on individuals redeeming properties, potentially leading to arguments about fairness and accessibility in property ownership.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding HB 335 may relate to the limits on reimbursement for improvements made by tax sale purchasers. Some stakeholders might express concerns that the caps on reimbursement could dissuade purchasers from investing significant amounts into properties if the costs exceed the set limits. Additionally, the requirement for conditional reimbursement could be contested, as it places additional financial pressure on the individual looking to redeem a property, raising questions about accessibility and the logistics of rehabilitation efforts in blighted areas.