Vacant Buildings Low Priority, says CE Director

----- Original Message -----
From: Lea Terhune
To: Russ Ellis ; Paul Decelles ; Kurt Wright
Cc: Mayor Kiss ; Eugene Bergman ; John Briggs
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 10:39 PM
Subject: CE mostly monitors rental properties?


Russ Ellis, Kurt Wright, Paul Decelles:

Is City Council aware that we get slow or no enforcement of the Vacant Building Ordinance because the CE Director has decided that it's a low priority for her office? Most of the staff time is spent on rental properties, she said, and cars parking on grass! Please consider whether this ordering of priorities is prudent, and request a review of CE office priorities and an accounting of fee collection.

I think enforcement of the vacant building code is a high priority for the city. Recently, a neighbor of mine was wakened at 2:30 am by someone prowling around his house which is adjacent to a vacant building at 2 Appletree Point Lane. A few days later, a criminal was caught hiding in a vacant building in Burlington. [Free Press: Nov. 9, Nov. 12, Nov. 15]

The Municipal Code Vacant Building Ordinance (Chapter 8 Buildings) is clear, well-written, simple and to the point: vacant buildings that are not maintained and secured are a blight on a neighborhood, attract vagrants and criminals, and are prime locations to conduct illegal criminal activities, including arson and drug use.

Early intervention is wise, and enforcing the Code is a preventive measure that saves the city money and protects the health and safety of residents. But you heard CE Director's excuses Thursday night: VB is a new ordinance, there hasn't been time to develop protocols for enforcement -- hogwash! The VB ordinance was passed by City Council 8-9-99, and an MOU has been in place since 2002 when CE requested that enforcement be moved to CE jurisdiction.

After two years of inaction on vacant building 2 Appletree Point Lane, we filed an appeal with the Public Works Commission. PWC issued an order to enforce the code and collect fees on Aug 14, 2008. CE office waited a month (Sept 19, 2008) to send a letter to one of the property owners (other owner/s not addressed), and enclosed a fee invoice that was jumbled and incorrect. Now, two months later, according to CE files, there has been no response from the property owners. The VB Code provides remedies for this: fines between $50 and $500 per day; and, in the case of public endangerment (structural instability), repair/stabilization done by city and lien placed on the property. That portico, reported by John Ryan on June 27, 2008 as structurally compromised, is about to come down! Photos.

Will you please come and look at the portico and judge for yourself? Soon, before it is too late? Children walk to and from school through this area. A child could be seriously injured. In June, John Ryan ordered access to the area to be restricted. The owners response? Ignored the order. Please do something.

Lea Terhune
22 Appletree Point Farm Lane
Burlington, VT 05408