Use a one-off registration amnesty carefully

Offer a short, one-time window in which owners of unregistered properties can come forward with reduced penalties for past non-registration. Used carefully, this can bring a large number of properties into the system before stricter follow-up begins.

• The city believes fear of back charges is keeping many owners from registering.

• Leadership wants a visible reset before tightening enforcement.

• Communication channels and front-office capacity can handle a surge.

• A clear legal decision on what is waived and for how long.

• A plan for immediate post-amnesty enforcement so the message stays credible.

• Do not repeat amnesties regularly; that trains people to wait.

• It should not be used instead of fixing the underlying register and follow-up process.

This can work as a reset, but only if it is clearly one-off and followed by firmer normal enforcement. Repeated amnesties tend to weaken payment culture because taxpayers learn to wait for the next waiver.

The full card would help the city plan eligibility, the communications campaign, surge capacity at counters, the short-term legal instrument, and the tougher follow-up that must begin once the amnesty window closes.

• Run a quick property self-registration drive; Use a clear overdue notice ladder.

• Put the register on firmer footing

• These cards are about turning one-off discoveries into a more reliable property record that can support billing and future updates.

A registration amnesty can be useful where non-registration has become locked in by fear. But it is a tool to unblock a specific problem, not a standing way of doing business. If it is repeated or poorly defined, it teaches people to wait for the next waiver rather than to register on time.

Bring reluctant owners into the register by offering a short, one-time waiver of selected past penalties or back charges for prior non-registration.

A city that believes fear of back charges or penalties is keeping a significant pool of owners from coming forward.

A surge of self-disclosed properties and a reset of some hard-to-reach cases before the city tightens normal enforcement.

Decide exactly what will be waived, for whom, for how long, and what stronger post-amnesty follow-up will begin once the window closes.

Revenue administration, backed by political leadership, finance or council approval, and a strong communications effort.

• The city believes many unregistered properties are staying outside the system because owners fear penalties or back charges.

• Leadership wants a visible reset before enforcing more normal rules.

• The city can handle a temporary increase in traffic at counters, help desks, or registration channels.

• Define the amnesty in plain language: what is waived, what is not waived, and when the offer ends.

• Prepare the front-office, verification, and data-entry capacity before announcing the campaign.

• Plan the post-amnesty enforcement sequence in advance so the city does not lose momentum once the window closes.

• Decide whether the waiver applies only to penalties and interest or also to part of the principal exposure.

• Choose whether the amnesty is open to all unregistered properties or only to targeted categories or areas.

• Set a short, credible window rather than an open-ended offer.

First 90 days

• Secure the legal or political approval needed to offer the amnesty.

• Design the communications campaign, proof requirements, and surge-capacity plan.

• Align registration, verification, billing, and enforcement teams around one clear set of rules.

6 to 12 months

• Run the amnesty for the defined period and track uptake closely.

• Move new or corrected records into the register quickly so participants see that the city is acting consistently.

• Keep the messaging disciplined: the offer is real, but it is exceptional and temporary.

12 to 24 months and beyond

• Publish the outcome and close the window cleanly.

• Begin the promised post-amnesty follow-up so taxpayers see that the city is no longer relying on repeated waivers.

• Review which types of property came in and which groups still remain outside the system.

• The city usually needs clear authority to waive penalties or other charges for a defined period.

• The terms should be transparent and easy to defend politically so the amnesty is not seen as arbitrary favouritism.

• A one-off amnesty needs surge processing capacity or it quickly becomes a queue-management problem.

• Communications must be coordinated tightly with the operating teams so taxpayers are not promised one thing and told another at the counter.

• The city needs a practical way to shift new records into normal administration immediately after the window.

• If repeated, the amnesty can undermine long-term payment culture and registration discipline.

• Poorly defined waivers can create disputes and accusations of unfairness.

• If leadership softens after the amnesty and does not follow up, the city loses credibility.

• Number of properties registered during the amnesty window.

• Share of amnesty registrations that are verified and fully loaded into the roll.

• Revenue collected during the campaign from principal amounts, penalties, or agreed settlements.

• Post-amnesty compliance and registration behaviour in the following cycle.

• This card should sit alongside PT-COV-01 if self-registration is the main intake channel, PT-COM-10 and PT-COM-11 if tougher follow-up will begin later, and PT-COM-17 if the city needs strong public explanation before and during the campaign.

• What exactly will the city waive, and why?

• How will the city prove that this is genuinely one-off?

• What enforcement or follow-up will begin immediately after the amnesty closes?

• Can the operating teams handle the temporary surge without creating a backlog?

• B. Put the register on firmer footing

• These cards are more structural. They help the city move from ad hoc discovery and patching to a register that is coherent enough to support billing, maintenance, and later valuation work.