‘Illegal junkyard’: Franklin increases fines on properties that violate city code

The complaints from Prospect Street have mounted: Piles of scrap metal and tires, abandoned vehicles, debris flying in the air when winds pick up and foul-smelling odors.

The two-acre parcel at 528 Prospect St. has been the worst offender of city codes in Franklin, but far from the only one.

Since 2007, the city has fined the property owner, while the dispute has moved in and out of the district court. The land is considered an “illegal junkyard” by the city, which has warranted multiple cleanups that have cost the city thousands.

In response to a complaint filed by the city, the property owner said he was experiencing mental health issues. He has sought treatment for it and has been able to clean up his yard better than in years past. He said the pressure from the city has induced “significant stress,” according to court documents.

The property owner’s counsel filed a motion for reasonable accommodations, citing that because his mental health struggles impact his day-to-day activities, the city should give him more time and resources to clear the yard.

The city objected and instead moved to increase the maximum fines for violating properties. In Franklin, property owners receive civil penalties of no more than $100 every day that a violation is found. The state recommends setting those fees higher — $275 for the first offense and $550 for any further offenses.

A sweep of the property in July will cost the city at least $32,500.

“We don’t get that money back until the property owner voluntarily pays us back or the property is sold,” said Franklin Fire Chief Michael Foss. “So, we will get our money back someday, but not until the property sells or the property owner makes it right with the community.”

On Monday, the City Council unanimously approved an amendment to increase fines for violating properties. Code enforcement officers and other officials hope to put more pressure on owners to comply with city ordinances and prevent legal escalation.

Franklin has cracked down on violation penalties since it hired a new city attorney in 2023.

That same year, the city challenged the Prospect Street homeowner to pay the overdue fines in Superior Court. As of October 2025, the owner at the property has been ordered to pay the city $78,500 in penalties. That amount would have been fivefold if Franklin had set its fines at the state standard.

An attorney for the property owner declined to comment on behalf of his client this story.

In a letter sent to the planning board in February, building inspection and code enforcement captain Tomas Hegener wrote that increasing the limit of violation fees could make a “significant difference.”

“Although these cases are few, and I do agree it is completely necessary to forcibly remediate the conditions, the best result is proactive enforcement to prevent any properties from reaching this level of non-compliance,” Hegener said in the letter. “As such, enforcing ordinances at the local District Court and levying more severe penalties should be our priority.”

Resources to address such issues, including going to court and conducting cleanups, are limited in Franklin. The city has two inspectors who wear multiple hats, including performing fire inspections.

David Chunn, the city’s zoning and planning director, said he and Foss also have a laundry list of projects that remain outstanding because of the lack of personnel.

“As with most things with Franklin, this is largely due to just decades of being under-resourced,” Chunn said. “A community of our size and of our population density and built environment, as far as the age of housing and demographics, would have a dedicated code enforcement unit who would just do this all day.”

Foss said the ultimate goal is to avoid litigation, since conditions at violating properties usually get worse as court cases remain “tied up for too long.” He said a majority of property owners address the issues when they meet with the city face to face.

Heavier penalties may be the ultimate deterrent, Foss said.

“If you want to get results, it’s no big secret,” he said. “You hit people in their wallets, and typically that’s when you get results.”

The property owner’s attorney asserted that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Prospect Street homeowner should be given extended time and grace given his ongoing mental health sturggles.

“Reasonable accommodations should be provided to allow a healthy and productive end to this matter,” his attorney wrote in the motion.

•••

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. Don’t just read this. Share it with one person who doesn’t usually follow local news — that’s how we make an impact. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.