Knee-high grass. Broken windows. Rusted car parts scattered across a lawn. Garbage bags stacked in a pyramid in a driveway. Derelict boat hulls rotting in an open garage.These are not a few of our favorite things.

They constitute blight. Residents who see such situations persist in their neighborhoods rightfully worry the messes are more than unsightly, they can promote the spread of vermin and insects and cause a decline in neighborhood property values.

For years, many towns have fought such messes, disrepair and threats to public health with local anti-blight ordinances. These ordinances largely have failed.

So, it's good news that cities such as Norwich and Groton recently enacted thoughtful, comprehensive, stringent anti-blight ordinances aimed at making more headway against the increased number of empty, neglected properties resulting from the economic downtown and accompanying housing slump in southeastern Connecticut.

These ordinances include precise definitions of what constitutes blight, detailed lists of categories of blight and carry fines of as much as $100 a day for those cited for allowing their property to slide into blight. Violators can end up not only with a hefty fine, but also with a lien on their property.

In Groton, City Mayor Marian Galbraith says that city's ordinance, adopted in March, has had positive results. Most property owners, when issued violation letters that give them five days to take action, simply clean up, make repairs or work with city officials to devise an acceptable timeline to complete the necessary work. Some non-resident property owners even thanked the city, she said, because the blight crackdown alerted them to the reality that contractors hired to maintain properties were not performing their duties.

In Norwich, the recently adopted ordinance remains untested. Mayor Deberey Hinchey is optimistic the beefed up law will help make the entire city safer and tidier. Said Hinchey of the current city conditions: "It's a rare neighborhood that doesn't have pockets of blight."

While ordinances that are more potent can help protect the general public, true success in fighting persistent and pervasive blight will result only in communities that dedicate sufficient money and staffing to these efforts. The $10,000 budgeted in Norwich for anti-blight enforcement, for example, seems a paltry sum that is not likely to ensure many cleanups or repairs.

Ferreting out absentee property owners, untangling the puzzle of legal ownership when properties are heading toward foreclosure, and working to clean up the properties that have been derelict for the longest periods, eats up time and money.

As long as the public's collective physical and financial health relies so heavily on robust property values, attacking blight must be a priority. Municipal officials must persist and strive to dedicate adequate resources to this important effort.