The city’s revived version of its Blighted Property Review Committee held its first meeting Thursday, with members learning about the history of the earlier iteration, which last functioned 17 years ago.

As before, the committee will evaluate properties suggested by the Codes Department for certification as blighted, but instead of all those being demolished, the committee this time will seek to identify those that are still in good enough condition to be renovated.

The change in strategy is part of a city effort to fortify its property tax base, with the committee playing an essential role — because its blight certification is needed for acquisition and renovation of properties by the Redevelopment Authority that the authority can’t obtain through negotiation.

The expectation is that the committee will be working closely with the Codes Department, especially Josh Kaufman, recently appointed to the newly created position of codes supervisor/ blight manager.

The BPRC existed previously because the city at that time acquired all blighted properties on which there were buildings it intended to demolish, officials have said.

There have been different explanations for the city abandoning that policy of acquisition before demolition — one of which was that the Department of Housing and Urban Development would not allow the continued use of the Community Development Block Grant money it provided for cutting the grass on such acquired properties for the long-term.

The city justified its continued demolition of blighted buildings after ceasing to acquire them prior to demolition by citing those demolitions as an exercise of its police power to remediate threats to the health, safety and welfare of the community.

Following that abandonment of acquisition before demolition 17 years ago, and following the idling of the BPRC, the Planning Commission took over responsibility for certifying properties as blighted, after which city staffers administered the demolitions.

During Thursday’s meeting, Codes Director Rebecca Brown showed pictures of a few vacant and blighted properties, two of which are probably too far gone to salvage — but one of which looks promising for rehab.

That property is in the Westmont neighborhood, near the old Curtin Elementary School.

It’s the kind of property that the committee has been revived to salvage, according to Brown.

If it were neglected for another year, it would probably become unsalvageable, she said.

In addition to code officers keeping tabs on blight through resident complaints and pro-active monitoring, information on blight can come to the Codes Department from other sources, including reports from the Altoona Water Authority, officials said.

Since the BPRC last operated, the city has accumulated more legal tools to help with blight reversal, including ordinances that require registration of vacant properties and registration of foreclosed properties and passage of a law under which the codes solicitor can charge sufficiently stubborn code violators with misdemeanors.

Since the BPRC last operated, the Redevelopment Authority has also taken on the role of a land bank and has become much more active.

Property rights limitations on code officers entering blighted homes remains a potential obstacle that may hinder the BPRC from making informed judgments about whether a property is a good candidate for rehabilitation, officials said.

There needs to be a balance between property rights protections against such entries and the city’s interest in evaluating the condition of the interiors of such properties, according to officials, including committee member and City Councilman Dave Butterbaugh.

One potential legal gateway for entry may be the need for “welfare checks” within such homes, Butterbaugh suggested.

The Planning Commission will make its last blight certifications at its next meeting, while the newly revived BPRC will make its first certifications later this month.

Mirror Staff Writer William Kibler is at 814-949-7038.