Hudseen has posted two articles on the subject of the disgraceful property known as 210 - 212 State Street -- one in March, and a follow-up one month later. The first conclusion I made in April was that there was a serious lack of proper attention to the property's 2 houses by the Hudson Code Enforcement Office, which long ago deemed the property Dangerous and Unsafe and to Be Vacated. The signs indicating these designations are either no longer attached to the houses or are so faded that they are unreadable.If the CEO felt it was important several years ago to tag the 2 houses with signs to let everyone know (including the property owner) what was going on with them, why would they ever let the signs disappear for more than a little while? Well, probably because CEO simply hasn't been paying attention to or regularly visiting the houses to check on any additional code violations or other issues worthy of attention. From the looks and inaccessibility of the sidewalk in front of 210-212 State Street today, it appears that this is the case recently.
In municipalities that understand how a property like this can be a nuisance, blight, and serious danger, they have their DPW maintain properties that the owner is unable or unwilling to maintain, billing the property owner for the work. It's really quite simple and effective. I believe that our code stipulates that this is to happen in Hudson, but those are just words.
Actual enforcement of the code is a whole different ball game.
The other conclusion I made in April was that Hudson City Hall does not adequately value the Code Enforcement Office. As I reported on then (and I think is worth repeating), the CEO's budget this year is around $174,000. This includes the $24,000 in annual rent they pay for the offices at 751 Warren Street that they had no option but to occupy, as well as $129,000 in wages and salaries for Craig Haigh, two part-time officers, and one part time clerk. Two part-time Code Enforcment officers, one part-time clerk! How much proper code enforcement can anyone expect from such a lack of investment in the CEO? Does this undervaluing and underfunding of the department continue well into the 21st century because that's the way it has always been done?
No comments:
Post a Comment