Litchfield Ordinance Officer Details 54 Active Cases, Court Backlog

Article Summary: Litchfield ordinance officer Shane Grammer told the City Council on Thursday, July 2, 2026, that he is carrying 54 active code cases while still working patrol duties, and walked the public through a warning-to-citation-to-court process that can stretch months before a property changes.

Code Enforcement Key Points:

• Grammer reported 54 active code enforcement cases and said the Litchfield Police Department fielded 1,993 calls for service from April 1 to June 30 — about 22 a day.
• Ordinance court convenes only one day a month, the first Tuesday, and contested cases can be set for trial two to three months out.
• One property owner who refused to act for eight months faced calculated fines exceeding $200,000; the case settled for $3,500 and a requirement that the property be sold.
• The city’s Strong Communities grant has funded 20 structures either already demolished or slated for demolition, but asbestos inspections are backlogged behind summer school work.

LITCHFIELD — Litchfield’s ordinance officer told the City Council on Thursday, July 2, 2026, that he is working 54 active code enforcement cases on top of patrol duties, and asked residents frustrated by tall grass and derelict houses to understand a legal process that can run months from first knock to final teardown.

Officer Shane Grammer, who said he is in his 24th year with the city as of June 16, appeared at the council’s invitation for a code enforcement update — the first item of new business. Fleming said he sought the presentation because “there’s a lot been a lot of misinformation out there” and wanted the explanation to come from the source.

“So the big question is, yes, I’m still a police officer,” Grammer said. “I just got the new position of ordinance officer.”

That dual role is the crux of his workload. Grammer said the police department logged 1,993 calls for service between April 1 and June 30, which he calculated at 22.14 calls a day, and that the department is short-staffed. He said he still handles walk-in complaints, phone calls from insurance companies and residents requesting reports, and responds to every traffic crash to direct traffic. He also remains the department’s quartermaster and range master, and has spent recent weeks re-qualifying officers on rifles fitted with new red dot optics.

“In a perfect world, 100% fully staffed, I can devote all my time to ordinance,” he said. “But as of right now, I have to prioritize.”

The Process, Step by Step

Grammer described a ladder of escalation. Most compliance, he said, comes from conversation alone. If that fails, he issues a written warning on which he copies the specific ordinance language from the city’s code website so there is no ambiguity about the violation.

If the warning is ignored, a citation follows, with a compliance window of five to 15 days set by code — five days for tall grass, 15 for inoperable vehicles. Roof replacements get more latitude. “I don’t expect you to do it in 15 days,” he said. “But I also tell everybody I need to see some kind of progress.”

The bottleneck is court. Ordinance court sits one day a month, the first Tuesday. A citation written June 30, Grammer said, would not be heard until Aug. 4. If the defendant demands a trial, the wait grows: “Ordinance doesn’t take priority over felonies, misdemeanors.”

He described a case that reached its conclusion the previous week in which a property owner had refused to touch his property for eight months. “We calculated $200,000-plus in fines,” Grammer said. “We settled for $3,500 bucks. And he has to sell the property first.” He said the man had to be escorted from the courtroom three times for yelling at the city attorney.

Vazquez circulated a code enforcement report prepared by the city’s attorneys and said her own count showed roughly 45 violations that went through the court process in 2026. “Each of those violations take about three code enforcement attempts before we see the light of day in court,” she said.

Demolitions Waiting on Asbestos Crews

Grammer credited the state’s Strong Communities grant — which he attributed to the grant-writing of the city’s current and immediately previous administrators — with paying for asbestos inspection, asbestos removal and the teardown of houses and outbuildings.

“So we have 20 since I’ve been doing it,” he said. “We’ve 20 that’s either going to be tore down or is already torn down.”

The holdup, he said, is inspectors. Few firms do asbestos work, and school is out, which means those crews are inside school buildings. “So Gary and I have to wait,” he said, referring to Building Inspector Gary Baker. “Or we’re on a list.”

He described a house on Walnut Street where police had to remove two trespassers who had gotten into a basement holding two feet of water, under a living room he said was propped up by a single 2×4. Asbestos crews could not safely enter, he said, and the structure is due to come down shortly.

‘Not a Money Grab’

The city attorney told the council the enforcement program is not a revenue exercise.

“We’re not looking to make money from this at all. That is honest to God the last thing that we’re looking for when it comes to code enforcement,” the attorney said. “We want compliance.” The cases before the council, the attorney added, “are the tip of the iceberg. These are just the cases where that didn’t work.”

Grammer said he has referred struggling property owners to churches and to a local volunteer group that has cleaned up yards for him, and described giving extra time to a woman on Chestnut Street he found cutting her weeds with a pair of scissors. “She came out. She apologized. I didn’t have to give a warning, nothing,” he said. Life-safety violations, both he and Fleming said, are the exception where no leniency applies.

One council member asked whether outdated ordinances could be reviewed and cleaned up, citing prohibitions on washing a horse in the lake and tying a horse downtown. “We can find things to nitpick about all day long, and I just would like some uniform clean up,” the member said. Grammer said he welcomed the direction.

Fleming said he and Grammer had discussed posting a frequently asked questions page on the city website walking residents through the enforcement process. Vazquez said the fastest route for a complaint is directly to Grammer rather than through a council member, which she called “a step in the telephone game that’s prolonging the process,” and said residents who contact him can expect contact with the property owner within 48 working hours.

Grammer gave his direct line as 217-324-8159 and said complaints can also be filed through a form on the city website.