Englewood — Vacancy-to-Revitalization

02 How the land sources overlap

• 389 City PIN matches — parcels present in both land sources.
• 1,898 City-inventory parcels outside the Assessor’s vacant-land classification (city land is mostly tax-exempt).
• 2,577 Assessor parcels not found in the City inventory.

03 Who controls the vacant land

Ownership across the 4,864 unique land parcels above — the single “who controls” claim.

City / Public = City-inventory parcels plus additional public parcels identified through assessor taxpayer records. Private and unknown counts are the reconciled taxpayer-of-record classifications over the same land universe. Raw taxpayer records alone would show City/Public 2.

03b Owner structure × geography

The same assessor vacant-land parcels, cross-tabulated by owner structure (from the taxpayer name) and geography (from the taxpayer mailing address).

Geography is the taxpayer mailing address’s state, not a claim about where an owner physically resides. Structure is inferred from public taxpayer-of-record name patterns.

04 Vacant buildings requiring verification

These are service-request sites, not owner-verified holdings — they are not “privately held.” An exact land-plus-building total should not be published until these sites are parcel-matched and deduplicated against the land universe above.

04b Exemption anomalies — records for review

Record anomalies warranting official review. A vacant land parcel cannot serve as a principal residence; these pairings are records discrepancies for the Assessor, Treasurer, and Clerk to adjudicate — no wrongdoing is asserted.

Exemption anomaliesNot yet available

05 What this means for action

Revitalization cannot depend on one acquisition strategy. It requires public-land disposition, local-owner partnerships, absentee-owner outreach, and targeted ownership verification.