Friday, May 11, 2012

New Britain Officials Encouraged By Early Effects Of Anti-Blight Ordinance - Courant.com

By DON STACOM
Posted by Frank Smith at 11.5.12

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mayor Pro-Temp, Michael Trueworthy's Answers Beget More Questions & More Answers & More Questions?

At the CPOA’s annual meeting Mayor Pro-Temp, Michael Trueworthy, was joined by Aldermen Manny Sanchez and Wilfredo Pabon and the three answered questions from the membership regarding the upcoming budget. The majority of questions were fielded by Trueworthy who provided some insight into the upcoming budget year, as well as some of his concerns with the Mayor’s proposed budget.

Trueworthy conceded that the Mayor’s budget was sparse on details and that as of yet there has been no formalized plan as to how to consolidate the departments. While he highlighted some efficiencies that could be gained through the consolidation of some services, such as the collection of fines, fees, tickets, and taxes through one office, he also was unable to answer questions as to how exactly department heads would be handled during the consolidation.

More troubling was Trueworthy’s statement that some of the Mayor’s proposed revenue increases were “inflated”. As an example he cited the recent changes of the blight ordinance, which was proposed as a possible revenue source for education. “To date,” Trueworthy said, “It has only brought in $660.” Another proposed change includes charging property owners for police calls in excess of 10 per year. The anticipated revenue from this change is rather unbelievable, especially when those funds would be greatly reduced by the cost of administering the policy. The fairness of such a policy was questioned by former Alderwoman Mary Marrocco who wondered why we should be punishing landlords for the bad actions of their tenants, especially when the eviction process to remove a troublesome tenant can take several months.

A final area of concern is the proposed layoff of 130 municipal employees. Trueworthy conceded that such cuts would be devastating for municipal services. He said he hoped that union concessions would be able to reduce that number, but with the blanket rejection of the Mayor’s concession package by local unions the prospects do not look good. The council is now left holding the bag with one of the least transparent and detailed budgets I have ever seen. Even municipal employees and department heads do not know where they stand, while the Mayor’s plan consolidated 21 departments down to 6 it gave absolutely no guidance as to how the moneys in each new departments budget are to be allocated between the various functions of the new department.

In short, the answers provided by Trueworthy only deepened my concerns for this upcoming fiscal year. It seem to me as if this budget, while it looks good on paper with a flat mill rate, is little more than wishful thinking. Departments are consolidated without a strong plan or vision as to how these new departments will function. Money has been allocated without clear direction as to how it will be spent. Massive layoffs threaten vital city services. And we the taxpayers are left to hold our breath and hope for some grand solution before our worst nightmares are realized.

May 13, 2012 at 1:52 AM
Anonymous said...

NEW BRITAIN — In a city that has struggled to control wide-scale blight for years, the recent cleanup of two vacant buildings doesn't change the big-picture view of what's wrong. But it's a start, says mayoral aide Phil Sherwood. New Britain's new anti-blight rules rang up thousands of dollars in fines against two out-of-town owners of 7 West St. and 14 Gilbert St., and created enough incentive to bring about quick work on the violations, Sherwood said.

In December the council passed Mayor Tim O'Brien's plan to hit serious violators of the anti-blight ordinance with $250-a-day fines. The key to that system is that it levies a separate fine for each violation; so an abandoned apartment house with 20 broken windows would be assessed $250 each day for each window. That runs up a bill of $5,000 a day, or roughly $150,000 in just a month.

So far, most of the owners who have been fined are just letting the penalties pile up, but O'Brien anticipates that some will pay and others will end up walking away from properties that they stopped maintaining months or even years ago.

"The city does not expect all owners will pay the fine," Sherwood said. "But those that don't fix the violations and don't pay the fines will see the fines accumulate daily, and eventually have a lien placed on their property." The city's plan is to take ownership of buildings when the total fines exceed the value of the property.

"The city isn't in the real estate business, but we can turn around and sell the property to a [new] developer for $1," Sherwood said. "

An association of landlords balked at the new rules this winter, warning that O'Brien was putting them at the mercy of any combative tenant who might break windows, throw garbage over the yard or paint graffiti on the outside walls. Those conditions all qualify as blight under the city's code.

Sherwood emphasized that New Britain targets only the most flagrant and uncooperative code violators. Properties with only a small number of relatively recent violations aren't the problem, he said; instead, the city wants to go after absentee owners who have ignored previous warnings and cleanup orders.

As of early May, the city had compiled fines of more than $92,000 on the three-family rental house at 18 Gilbert St., and $90,000 on another at 25 Gilbert. The owners of 14 Gilbert, however, responded quickly: They painted the bare plywood covering windows, cleared trash from the yard, and fixed loose siding and a broken fence, according to city records. New Britain is waiving the fines it had accumulated against the owner.

Just down the street, the ower of 7 West St. cleared away trash, boarded up broken windows and replaced missing doors that were cited in a Feb. 18 warning. "It's not that bad since then," neighbor John Choci said. "It's getting better."

May 13, 2012 at 2:02 AM
Anonymous said...

Why are the courant and the herald making it sound like O'Brien has done more to fight blight in his first few months than stewart over the last 8 years?

May 13, 2012 at 10:58 AM
Anonymous said...

Didn't this band of misfits claim to balance their budget on the bags of money that were expected to poor in from all those fines they were going to extort from those evil rich property owners?

May 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM
Anonymous said...

Wow what a Brilliant Idea ( not), Lets get the property on trumped up fines, so we never get cash, just junk property, then spend tens of thousands of dollars on them ( 10,20 or 30 even)cleaning, repair, securing and maintaining. Then give them away for a single dollar, $1.

Phil and Tim you are two of the dumbest people in the world. Have someone read and explain what I just wrote. WE WILL LOSE MONEY, NOT INCREASE OUR CITY REVENUE !!!!!

Good bye NB, Last one out turn off the lights, and lock the gate behind you, we are done

May 15, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Web Tracking
Online Florist