Riverton — A Riverton homeowner told the City Council on Nov. 4 she has endured more than a year of unsanitary conditions and criminal activity next door and asked the city to force a cleanup.

Brenda Moore described repeated piles of garbage, open human waste, daytime public intoxication and at least one violent incident near her home. “The whole yard is a biohazard that children or anyone else should not have to contend with,” she told the council. She said the property had been without water and power for months and that many different individuals cycled through the address.

City staff and the city attorney outlined recent enforcement steps. The property was cited, occupants were convicted in municipal court and the mortgage holder foreclosed. City staff said the sheriff’s deed recently issued and that the mortgage-holder’s attorney told staff the holder will initiate forcible entry and detainer (eviction). Staff explained the likely sequence: a three-day notice to quit, then an eviction hearing (which can require several days to schedule), then possession by the mortgage holder; once the holder takes possession it is responsible to clean the property.

Staff and the city attorney also told the resident that the city has limited nuisance-abatement funds and that abatement is complicated while title is in flux. Chief staff comments said the city could step in and hire abatement if the owner or mortgage holder didn’t act, but the city would seek to recover costs and acknowledged that fines are not always an effective incentive when occupants are financially insolvent.

Council response: Council members sympathized and said staff would continue to press the mortgage holder for a prompt cleanup and would consider options to shore up code enforcement and nuisance-abatement authority in future code revisions.

Why it matters: The case shows how foreclosure and property-title processes interact with municipal code enforcement. Until title clears, the city’s direct abatement options are legally and financially constrained; elected officials discussed the possibility of changes in local code to address gaps in the enforcement toolkit.

Follow-up: City staff said they will continue communications with the mortgage company and the sheriff’s office and will explore whether the city should seek additional local code tools or dedicated abatement funds.