San Antonio could soon impose new penalties on property owners and residents responsible for chronic nuisance properties under a proposed ordinance aimed at strengthening the city’s Good Neighbor Program.

The City Council’s Public Safety Committee unanimously advanced a proposal Tuesday to allow fines of up to $500 to individuals who fail to cooperate with efforts to address properties that repeatedly fall out of compliance with city regulations.

The Good Neighbor Program was established in 2023 to identify residential properties generating repeated complaints across multiple city departments, including police, fire, code enforcement and animal services.

The program aims to address properties where individual violations may be considered low priority by one department but collectively indicate a larger public safety concern and demand on city services.

However, city officials say the program has struggled to get some property owners and residents to cooperate, limiting its ability to address recurring violations.

Maria Vargas-Yates, director of the city’s Integrated Community Safety Office, which oversees the program, told committee members that the program identified 55 cases in 2026. Of those, 19 involved property owners or residents who remained unresponsive despite repeated attempts to contact them through letters and in-person visits.

Vargas-Yates said the ordinance would give the city an additional enforcement mechanism to hold property owners and residents accountable.

It would also help address properties that repeatedly fall out of compliance, including cases where owners correct violations after receiving notices only for the same problems to return once enforcement proceedings are dismissed. 

Under the proposed ordinance, properties could be designated as chronic nuisances after accumulating four municipal court cases involving nuisance violations within a year or eight documented violations or warnings within a year. 

Property owners or residents designated under the ordinance would be required to register with the city and develop a chronic nuisance abatement plan outlining steps to address recurring problems.

The ordinance would also apply to people who repeatedly report problems the city cannot verify, including those who submit 16 or more complaints within a year that result in investigations finding no violations.

Those complaints could include calls to 911, nonemergency services or 311, as well as reports submitted through emails, online forms or mobile applications. The city could work with those individuals through education or mediation to address ongoing neighborhood disputes. 

Vargas-Yates emphasized that enrollment in the program would not automatically result in penalties. Instead, fines of up to $500 could be issued for failing to register, agree to an abatement plan or complete its requirements. 

Raymond Najera, whose 81-year-old father, Ramon Najera, was killed in a dog attack on San Antonio’s West Side, spoke in support of strengthening the program on Tuesday. The Good Neighbor Program was established shortly after his father’s death in 2023.

Najera said the attack, which also left his stepmother hospitalized, exposed failures in the city’s ability to recognize and respond to repeated complaints about dangerous properties. 

According to Najera, 156 911 or 311 reports had been made concerning the property where his father was attacked over the preceding 34 months, but those complaints failed to prompt an effective response from the city. 

“Concerned citizens of Depla Street were doing their part, actively engaging, watching and caring for the community to see something and say something,” Najera told committee members.

While Najera supports the Good Neighbor Program’s mission, he questioned whether the program is working as intended to address the failures in the reporting and enforcement systems that he believes contributed to his father’s death.

“There is still no effective solution yet to the city’s fragmented system of reporting and code enforcement,” he said. “I highly encourage the public safety committee to assess the true goal and create effective initiatives that address fear and calls for help at problematic properties.” 

Council members expressed support for the ordinance but questioned whether the city has enough staff to take on additional responsibilities.

During the discussion, District 5 Councilwoman Teri Castillo asked how many employees were responsible for managing the program’s workload. Vargas-Yates responded that just one program manager oversees its cases, raising concerns about the additional follow-ups and municipal court proceedings the ordinance could require. 

“This is a huge task and big caseload,” Castillo said, urging city officials to prioritize identifying additional support for the program.