WASHINGTON – The city of Dunedin, Florida, which has been under scrutiny for massive fines imposed on homeowners, has dismissed a lawsuit against a woman who was fined more than $100,000 over code enforcement violations at a house she no longer owned.

The city said in a brief court filing late Monday that it is voluntarily dismissing the lawsuit against Kristi Allen, a former Dunedin resident who was fined $103,559 – about twice her yearly income – over a dirty swimming pool and overgrown vegetation at a house she said she left to the bank eight years ago.

The dismissal comes about a month after USA TODAY chronicled Allen's story and the city's history of imposing exorbitant fines – sometimes tens of thousands of dollars at a time – for violating laws that prohibit grasses taller than 10 inches, recreational vehicles parked on streets at certain hours, sidings and bricks that don't match or dirty pools. Over the past 5½ years, the city has collected nearly $3.6 million in fines while its revenue grew.

Excessive fines? A Florida woman was fined $100,000 for a dirty pool and overgrown grass.

Across the country, fines have become a reliable source of revenue for cash-starved cities, and they have become a big – and rapidly growing – business for local governments. States, cities and counties collected $15.3 billion in fines and forfeitures in 2016, according to the most recent financial data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau. That's a 44% jump from a decade earlier.

The litigation against Allen, a 38-year-old mother of two, threatened to bankrupt her and her family.

"I could finally breathe again. It's funny because this has been going on for so long. It hasn't really sunk in yet," she said after the lawsuit was dismissed. "I've been playing defense for so long; it's hard to take yourself out of defense mode."

"The fact is that they had zero case and they realized that," she said of Dunedin officials.

Jennifer Bramley, city manager, said the "circumstances" of Allen's case "made it possible" for Dunedin to dismiss the lawsuit.

"The property has been brought into compliance and it is clearly in the public interest for the City to end the litigation so that Ms. Allen can move forward in a positive way," Bramley said in an email.

Bramley said city officials have started a "thorough review" of Dunedin's code enforcement practices. Officials are looking at placing a cap on fines for minor violations and rules on how to deal with repeat code offenders, among other things. In Dunedin, a repeat code violator can be charged $500 a day even without notice.

Excessive fines are unconstitutional

In February, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that excessive fines are unconstitutional – the first constraint by a federal court on how much money local governments can charge people for everything from speeding to overgrown lawns. But the ruling, while lauded by civil rights groups, left it up to cities and states to determine when a fine is considered excessive.

Allen is one of several homeowners who have accused Dunedin, a small seaside city outside of Tampa, of overzealous code enforcement and massive fines over violations that have more to do with aesthetics than public safety. Homeowners said they were blindsided by fines that accumulated at a rate of $100 to $500 a day. Others said they were fined even as they tried to fix the violations.

Ron Sachs, a public relations expert the city hired amid controversy over another homeowner who was fined $30,000 because of an overgrown lawn, said earlier that fines Dunedin imposes are neither excessive nor abusive. Those who end up owing the city thousands of dollars in fines are homeowners "who have chosen to stay in violation," Sachs said.

His company no longer represents the city.

At a city commission workshop last month, Dunedin officials railed against press coverage of their code enforcement process, saying Dunedin had been unfairly portrayed and criticized in the media, and coverage has resulted in death threats and obscene phone calls. Still, officials recognized the need to examine current practices.

"There's obviously something here that folks are reacting to that we're having to deal with," Mayor Julie Bujalski said during the workshop. "To take action is not – certainly doesn't make us look like we're listening. Inaction is a problem. Taking some action and evaluating things, I think, is important that we do that."

A fight over government power

In Allen's case, she said she did not know she owed anything until fall of last year – seven years after she moved out of her Dunedin home – when she received a letter from the city attorney telling her she owed $92,600 in fines over overgrown vegetation and a stagnant swimming pool. That amount did not include interest and other administrative charges. Three months later, in December 2018, the city sued, setting off a legal fight over how local governments use their power to impose heavy fines on citizens.

Allen bought her Dunedin home in 2005. But a few years later, Allen, a radiologic technologist, took a pay cut and lost her house in the wave of foreclosures that swept over Florida and the country. In 2011, she signed an agreement with the U.S. Bank National Association allowing the foreclosure and moved out. But the foreclosure would not be finalized for another three years, and her name would remain in county property records. Meanwhile, the house was vacant. Brown palm fronds littered the overgrown backyard, the swimming pool turned green, and the house became a neighborhood nuisance.

City officials sent notices to Allen, telling her of the problems. The letters were mailed to Allen at the Dunedin house instead of her current address and were returned undeliverable with no forwarding address. The city later imposed a fine of $100 a day, and the amount accumulated for two more years – even after the foreclosure was finalized in late 2014 and Allen no longer owned the house.

Ben Hillard, Allen's attorney, said he wasn't surprised that the city dismissed the case. Before the lawsuit was dismissed, he said he was seeking records that would have shown the city knew Allen's correct address but instead mailed the notices of violations at her old one, allowing the fines to accumulate.

The city's attorneys previously argued in court records that Allen should pay, citing a state statute saying a lien the city placed on the house where the violation occurred applies to other personal property Allen owned. In Florida and elsewhere, unpaid fines can be attached to someone's property through liens, allowing cities to foreclose and take the property to collect what they're owed. Because Allen no longer owns the house, the city sought other ways to collect.

The city dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning officials can refile the lawsuit if they choose to do so, though that is unlikely. Bramley, the city manager, said officials don't intend to collect the fines through other means.

Hillard said he plans to ask the court to require the city to pay for Allen's legal expenses.

"It’s not just my win; it’s everyone’s win, the other people that are still out there fighting it," Allen said, referring to other homeowners who still owe the city thousands of dollars in fines. "This is a win for us."