Oak Harbor mulls options for deserted properties

Published 1:30 am Tuesday, May 19, 2026

Zombie properties in Oak Harbor aren’t going to eat your brains, but they might invite unwanted squatters.

Oak Harbor City Council members discussed the implementation of an ordinance that could impact how the city deals with abandoned properties after Councilmember Barbara expressed her concern at a previous workshop.

During a workshop on May 12, City Attorney Hillary Evans and Community Development Director Stacie Pratschner outlined what they believed to be lose-lose solutions for abating these deserted houses. Council members, however, were less willing to dismiss the potential solutions.

A zombie property is a home abandoned by its legal owner, Evans explained. It becomes a sort of “no man’s land.” Sometimes people desert their homes because they can’t afford to pay their mortgage, have bank issues or walk away before the foreclosure process is finished, among other reasons, she noted. These unmanaged homes often fall apart, fill with pests, become overrun by weeds and attract squatters.

Police Chief Tony Slowik estimated there may be less than six abandoned properties in the city. They have not yet done an inventory of all of the houses that can be considered “zombie properties,” Pratschner said.

“We frankly don’t have any idea how many of these properties exist in city limts and how dangerous they might be,” Evans agreed.

Pratschner noted that there are no recorded code enforcement complaints in her department for a “concern about an abandoned property” within the last three years. The reason, she said, is that many people aren’t finding an issue with the fact that it is abandoned, but with the associated problems that come with the place.

Washington state legislation allows cities or mortgage services to start nuisance abatement at owner-abandoned properties. This means city staff or individual entities can start nuisance abatements with such properties when they are mid-foreclosure.

However, actually finding the legal owner, and one who is cooperative, is difficult, Evans said. Additionally, issues in transferring the property often arise when there are HOA liens, judgment liens, a mortgage balance and more. Notices of violation and voluntary correction agreements are often ineffective when an owner cannot be found.

“When there’s no owner to talk to, compliance becomes impossible and we don’t have very many legal rights about getting onto the property and that’s where the problem arises,” Evans said. “Spoiler alert, there’s no really good fix.”

Evans recommended that the council members’ first order of business be to determine whether zombie properties are actually a widespread issue in Oak Harbor before pursuing major policy changes. If council members believe these properties are a significant issue, Evans said, they could consider adopting approaches similar to code-enforcement systems used in cities such as Seattle and Spokane.

One solution would be to use the city’s existing chronic nuisance ordinance to address properties connected to drug violations. Evans cautioned that such enforcement would likely be treated as a public service expense, and the city may never recover the money spent on abatement.

Councilmember Sandi Peterson pushed back on the argument that cost recovery should determine whether the city acts. She said the city already provides many public services that do not generate reimbursement, and therefore, it is an irrelevant argument.

Another possible approach, which Evans described as “less risky” but as having “less teeth,” would involve creating a vacant building monitoring program. Under that system, the city would regularly inspect vacant properties and ensure they remain safe.

Another option Evans floated was an emergency warrant abatement for properties that pose immediate dangers to the public, such as a broken water line flooding the public right of way. She noted relatively few abandoned properties likely qualify as a threat to public safety. Again, Peterson disagreed. She argued that abandoned homes that attract squatters, gang members and drug users can become public safety threats and negatively affect neighborhoods. She added that securing or removing dangerous properties could improve the safety and well-being of communities.

Another possibility, Evans said, would be adopting code language that defines vacant or boarded-up buildings and establishes requirements for securing them. She pointed to Spokane’s code, which classifies a boarded-up building as “unfit” after one year.

A more creative option, Evan said, is that the city council members could also consider ordinances allowing the fire department to demolish abandoned structures under certain circumstances. This one, Peterson voiced her approval for. Councilmember Barbara Armes, who also liked this option the best, insisted that her neighbors wanted the zombie property in their own neighborhood gone.

“The neighbors are getting tired of it and it’s just sitting there, probably for the last three years,” she said. “But, I appreciate both of you looking into it.”

Other potential strategies Evans highlighted were partnering with developers interested in rehabilitating abandoned homes in exchange for favorable property deals. The city could also attempt to force compliance by suing homeowners, though Evans said that process would likely require substantial legal resources and may not be practical for Oak Harbor.

Councilmember Bryan Stucky floated another possible solution based on his experience as a funeral director. He suggested city staff could pursue a creditor’s claim, and if no one responds, an attorney could become the personal representative to liquidate the assets. Evans responded that the idea isn’t impossible, but they may have to be patient and sit on a lien or a claim like that, collecting interest for many years before it turns over.

Mayor Pro Tempore Tara Hizon noted that she wants to move forward with the most productive route. She agreed that making an inventory of the zombie properties in city limits is a good starting point.

“This is a frustrating problem,” she said. “But it also doesn’t seem right to just kind of throw up our hands.”

Peterson agreed that she intends to address the problem.

“We cannot just say there is nothing we can do,” she said.