Butler city officials are continuing their war against blighted and abandoned properties that began last year. That’s commendable.

Failure to confront blight is an invitation for more.

Adjoining property owners have less incentive to invest in their properties if their property values are being damaged by blighted nearby structures. Even if they’re willing to do fix-up work on their home’s interior, some homeowners are reluctant to pursue extensive outside work when blighted conditions surround them. That’s a scenario that is in play regarding some Butler residences.

Meanwhile, blight is an invitation to insects, rodents and potential fire and other health-related hazards. Over time, blight can consume entire blocks or neighborhoods — and, beyond that, make an entire community less attractive to people who might otherwise consider buying property there.

Continuing the assault on blight that proved to be a notable accomplishment of 2010, the city council, acting in the capacity of board of health, last week approved condemnation of seven more properties, putting them in line for demolition. However, the next house scheduled to be razed is at 734 Center Ave., which earlier was put on the demolition schedule.

In October, the council identified 125 blighted properties; in December, city officials released a list of 33 properties they said they hoped could be saved by selling them to new owners who would rehabilitate them.

Amid the process of razing structures too deteriorated to save is the task of encouraging new construction as soon as possible to replace what formerly existed.

Although it might be advantageous to a neighborhood’s appearance if some of the land in question remained vacant — if it were bought by an adjoining property owner to expand his or her yard — that possibility must be weighed against the lower amount of property taxes that the land, without a home on it, would generate.

The city’s mounting fiscal problems require more tax revenue, not less.

The number of blighted properties is proof that blight was a problem too long ignored and raises questions about the city’s ordinance enforcement in past years. That acknowledged, it now is encouraging to see the pace at which city officials are addressing this troubling issue.

The effort appears steady and correctly targeted.

The right message now is being delivered — that blight no longer will be tolerated. But the important task revolving around future use of newly vacant land must likewise be given serious attention.

Eradicating blight is just half the task that must continue on a steady, determined pace.