Q: My tenants incurred a fine from the city that claimed that their poor housekeeping (really, their yard-keeping) was a violation of city codes. The ordinance says I'm responsible for paying the fine, too. I think that's unfair — after all, I can't just enter the property and take their junk and clean it up!
A: It sounds like your city inspectors concluded that the yard constituted a blight: an unhealthy or extremely unattractive condition that they thought was offensive and needed to be cleaned up. Typical examples of blight include junker cars parked on lawns, discarded furniture and appliances and extremely overgrown foliage.
When conditions deteriorate badly, they may even be a public nuisance, which is another way of saying that the public sense of cleanliness and order has been offended. Blight and nuisance laws are very common; almost always, the owner is given a chance to clean up the problem before facing fines.
When a tenant occupies the property, the city's initial response will be no different than when the owner himself is in residence: notice of the violation and a chance to clean up. But because you have considerable say in how your property is used by a tenant, the city will also look to you if the tenant doesn't get busy. While it is true you cannot enter the premises and dispose of the tenant's belongings, you can take steps that would indirectly accomplish the inspector's goals.
Your state doubtless imposes "good housekeeping" rules on residential tenants, which include the duty to take reasonably good care of the property. Violations of this duty enable the landlord to terminate the tenancy and evict if needed. Upon learning of the violations contemplated by the inspectors, you should have put your tenants on notice of their failure to abide by the legal requirement to use the property with care. Faced with the prospect of losing their tenancy — backed up with a properly worded "cure or quit" notice — your tenants might have cleaned up.
Tenants who stubbornly refuse to deal with the blight they create should lose their tenancy. If you had tried unsuccessfully to get the tenants to cooperate, you could have contacted the city to tell them of your plans. I suspect that inspectors who realize they're dealing with a motivated landlord would have held off on the fine and waited for you to complete the eviction process (if not contested, it should be fairly quick).
You can probably use the tenant's deposit to cover the cost of the fine. That may be cold comfort; from the sounds of things, you'll need that deposit to deal with damage, and it may not even be enough to cover your losses.