Proposed Ordinance Aims to Track and Curb Long‑Vacant Downtown Storefronts
by James Coulter
Downtown storefronts left vacant for more than 30 days may be subject to a mandatory registration requirement under a proposed ordinance.
At their work session on Wed. Mar. 12, Lake Wales city commissioners reviewed the draft for a vacancy ordinance addressing vacant commercial buildings in the Downtown Historic Overlay District.
The ordinance would make it unlawful for any building within the Downtown area to remain vacant for more than 30 days unless it has an active building permit for demolition, construction, alteration, modification, rehabilitation, or repair, or is a multi-tenant property that is 80 percent occupied.
Any building that becomes vacant for more than 30 days must be registered by the owner, with violators “subject to the fine provisions and code enforcement provisions to the maximum extent authorized by State law and the City of Lake Wales,” as outlined in the ordinance draft.
City Manager James Slatton mentioned that the ordinance was drafted from similar ordinances across the state and country: “So they [city staff] have taken the best pieces [of other ordinances] and tailored them to Lake Wales.”
Deputy Mayor Robin Gibson praised the ordinance as a “real revitalization strategy,” arguing it was essential for spurring downtown economic growth, especially since vacant storefronts often deter prospective businesses.
He added that empty buildings drain local revenue, noting that a single vacant storefront can cost a community more than $400,000 in lost sales taxes and wages. With at least 20 empty buildings downtown, he estimated the annual impact at over $8 million.
He also argued that the ordinance was crucial for securing future government funding, noting that recent revitalization projects have shown the city can put such investments to effective use.
But that success, he warned, could also potentially attract opportunists who buy rundown buildings, inflate prices to block legitimate buyers, and then profit from public improvements.
As such, he wants this ordinance “to provide as much incentive as humanly and legally possible” to avoid such exploitation through “over-anticipating the market.
“So, when we make that investment, we have to make sure there is fairness that a company is making this investment, and for those who exploit, they pay a price,” he said. “Call it a fee. Call it a fine. Call it a penalty. And stay away from a jail term. That is what I am going to do.”
Commissioner Carol Gillespie asked if the ordinance would create “a series of fines.” Deputy Mayor Gibson said he would prefer to avoid the term “fine” and use “registration fee.”
Gillespie then asked whether it was fair to assume that the mass vacancies in the downtown area were due to “exploitation” by the owners rather than other factors.
Gibson replied that he was more than certain that many owners were “not investing in their properties to attract occupancies, and they are indeed exploiting the investment the public has made.”
Commissioner Keith Thompson insisted the current problem was a result of “simple math” and a “multifaceted challenge with property owners”, specifically claiming how many buildings were owned by a single non-profit.
“It does not make sense for a non-profit to own that much property downtown,” he said. “We do have developers who are interested in downtown…we just need some people to get out of the way of what is happening.”
