In a memo to Cincinnati City Council, city manager Milton Dohoney Jr. says that the Cincinnati Police Department's response to a group of Westwood residents who took it upon themselves to board up a problem property was done to protect them from possible criminal liability – and from criminals who might be hiding inside.
The memo is in response to an e-mail from Mary Kuhl of Westwood Concern to Cincinnati City Councilmember and chair of council's Vibrant Neighborhoods committee Roxanne Qualls seeking answers on why the police response was so swift and heavy against people who were just trying to do the right thing.
On April 1, following several calls to various City departments and to the police, a group of five residents, including Kuhl, decided to take it upon themselves to board up an abandoned building at that had become a haven for drug dealing and prostitution.
Dohoney says that standard procedures were followed for addressing the building's issues, but were held up on several occasions due to changes in ownership.
A call to secure the property came from the police that morning, and permission to enter the building was received from California-based building owner Stonecrest Investments, LLC that afternoon.
A vendor was contacted to perform the work.
"The vendor agreed to expedite the work, which was completed that afternoon," Dohoney says. "PMCE [Property Maintenance Code Enforcement] inspected the work to verify that it complied with the Municipal Code."
City beats them to the punch
In her e-mail, Kuhl says that she had received a number of phone calls during the day saying that the City had found out about the residents' plan and was planning to send a contractor to secure the building before the group got there.
"What we found when we got there was that indeed the City or a contractor for the City had been there and boarded up the front door, installed two padlocks and left," she says. "Mind you that the rest of the ground floor windows and doors were NOT boarded up, and were accessible to anyone who wanted to break in."
That's when her group began boarding up the windows with plywood and picking up litter in the yard.
Kuhl says that Jane Prendergast, a reporter with the Cincinnati Enquirer, came to the site and asked what the group was doing.
After finding out what the group was up to, Kuhl says that Prendergast placed a call to Department of Community Development director Michael Cervay, and he wasn't happy.
"Approximately 20 minutes or so after she had made that call, I received a phone call letting me know that the police were on the way," she says.
Since they were done, Kuhl says thay they picked up their tools and left; Kuhl watched the upcoming events from her neighbor's front porch.
"What happened after we had left is that, about five minutes later, not one, not two, not three, not four, but five police cars showed up!" Kuhl says. "Five police cars for five middle-aged people simply boarding up a problem, vacant property! Good grief!"
An attempt to "go after" Westwood?
Kuhl believes that the response was an attempt to "go after" the people of Westwood, all initiated by Cervay.
"This is just one of many problems Westwood has had with Michael Cervay and how he operates his department...which is not so good," Kuhl says. "All he has to do is 'keep his head down' and he gets to do what the hell he and his staff wants to do regardless of what any elected official tells them to do."
But Dohoney says that the windows were intact and permissible under the Cincinnati Municipal Code and that an assistant city manager, who was acting in Dohoney's stead, directed Cervay to call the police because of safety and liability concerns.
"These steps were requested to protect the citizens as it had been alleged that the property in question was the scene of criminal activity," he says. "Furthermore, it was an attempt to warn the citizens that by entering the property, and doing additional boarding, could constitute trespassing and be considered damaging private property."
Dohoney says that the City is looking at better ways to inform citizens, like expanded use of the City website, and is looking at ways to expedite the abatement process.
"To avoid the cycle of re-issuance of orders each time a vacated property changes hands, the Department of Community Development is working with the Law Department to establish a system to record a Code Violation Notice, or Affidavit of Fact, against the titles of derelict properties," he says. "However, this may require new code provisions and language to enable the recording of Affidavit of Fact to serve as adequate service of Notice of Violation."
Taking these steps would help reduce or eliminate citizen frustration, Dohoney says.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Police response to Westwood 'boarders' because of liability, safety issues
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I drive by this house every weekend. It had a for sale 500 down/350 month sign on it for the longest time. It sits in a decent block and frankly is restorable.
What we need to do is change the ordinance from "board" to ordinance to "secure" which would mean ALL first floor windows and doors. This is 'common sense" (not in city government vocabulary)and the standard in most cities.This really is an example of a house where a VBML should be required.
The problem is? Now the city will probably over-react and before long we will have another enpty lot that contributes nothing to the city taxbase or historic character of that block.
What the city should do is send a bill for the boarding and when the property owner doesnt pay, place a lien against the property and go to court to have the property released to the city for non payment of the cost of boarding and "give' it to Westwood to restore. Of course that will take months and the house will further
deteriorate.
Short of that,maybe a group of Westwood resident could get a few thousand together and buy it. Paint the facade, plant some flowers and resell it with a protective covenant that it must be restored and owner occupied.I'd donate some time to help clean it up and I am sure others would too.
That is how you fix the problem!
But neighborhood leaders are tired of city with a "bulldoze mentality" and doing things half way, I don't blame them for what they did as it points out the "flaws" in the city ordinance as written.
What a backward city. I suppose you would want to arrest someone for cutting the grass of a neglected house too. Go ahead let this place become like Detroit. Stifle citizen involvement before it becomes epidemic, Be sure to keep them all as apathetic followers.
The cowardly "snitch" should be arrested.
Generally, I support the Cincinnati Police Dept. in the difficult job they have to do with so few resources -- but to send (5) police cars to this location? C'mon. When people complained about what was going on inside this vacant house why didn't 5 cars arrive then?
The city was afraid of being embarrassed because of their pathetic response to blight in our neighborhoods. Guess what? They look even more stupid now.
Why not send the SWAT team out next time when I'm picking up garbage off the street outside CMHA properties?
Ridiculous.
The reason given by the city manager is not the reason we were given after the event. At a Vibrant Neighborhoods Committee meeting, which I attended, we were told that the "boarders" were trespassing and violating the law. There was no mention of the fact that the "boarders" could be in danger and that they needed protection. In fact, the police had been contacted ahead of time and told that this was going to happen. The police were INVITED to attend so that they could sweep the home before boarding began to make sure no one was inside. The group waited 45 minutes and only began when it became clear that the police were not coming. The city manager has either been misinformed or he is lying.
I did a little research on Stonecrest LLC and they own 5 other properties ALL have 'issues' with the city. Interestingly enough, 1 of the properties at 4721 seems to have been owned by Destiny Ventures, another major "problem property owner" who has been shuffling properties off into other "holding companies' to avoid VBML and condemnation hearings. We have one in our neighborhood that they are playing this 'shell game' on so they can avoid hearings and orders, and keep it rented out even though it was ordered vacant long ago because it was unfit for habitation.
AMAZING to me, that I can spend 5 minutes at the auditors site, find out how many properties they own, that ALL have issues and the city can't figure out a way to take all their properties into 1 hearing? OR a way to 'Flag" any more properties they buy so the city can get an early start on enforcement and neighborhoods are not forced to take matters into their own hands.
Maybe we as neighborhoods need to talk more and maybe set up our own "slumlord watchlist website' where we can track whenever one of these "purveyors of substandard properties' buys in our neighborhood. Maybe an "early warning system" for neighborood groups and a way to track inaction or incompetence on the part of the city?
^ Paul, I always thought that a "slumlord" website would be a good idea. Under what criteria would someone be classified as such?
The City does put a lien on the property for securing a building and also for cutting grass at vacant or abandoned buildings.
Bottom line is the City is overwhelmed with vacant buildings. Whether they are owned by people who just let them sit or if they are in foreclosure, the building dept is overwhelmed. And lets not just point fingers at Mr. Cervay (who I as well am not a big fan of) but how about Mr. Graves as well--between these two men, the inspectors have no way to follow up on complaints and communities are suffering. The inspectors tried to warn us of all this when they made their changes to the departments--some of us listened and tried to do something about it then, but their wasnt enough voices at the time. Hopefully changes can be made now so our neighborhoods are not brought down by absentee landlords and/or those who just dont care about their properties.
Dawn, I agrre the city inspection department is clearly underfunded and overworked.
The problem appears to be more with city legal not filing liens in a timely manner (if at all) and I have been told by more than one person in city government ( I even kept the emails) that the city doesnt pursue liens because they do not want to get "stuck" owning more property if they enforce the liens.
That attitude has to change. The city needs to set up a workable land bank that neighborhood groups can "buy" from ( say for a dollar) stabilize those houses using volunteers and resell them with protective covenants to owner occupants who agree,in advance,to pull permits and demonstrate finacial capability to finance the project.
It works in other cities and it can work in Cincinnati.
Kevin: "slumlord" of course is not the term we would use. I would think the The Problem Property Watch might be a better term. Basically a clearing house website where Groups post their problem properties. We cover the city VBML/demo hearings and such
as well. As you build a database the same names will pop up like Destiny Ventures for example. Throw all that in an access database and do a new property search at the auditors office website periodically on the "Major Offenders List" and you will know what new "potential problems" there are and the neighborhoods they are in. That way groups geta 'heads up' on potential problems.
The real problem is with the city tracking site. You can only search by exact address not name. Thats why these people fall through the cracks. Inspections may have 10 different cases with different inspectors going and the city lacks the ability to leverage by putting them all under one case. Imagine the impact iof you combine all the cases and 200 people from different neighborhood show up en mass against a property owner because they know when the hearing is becaiuse the neighborhood groups are working together and coordinating.
The city used to have a program selling houses for $1. The purchasers had to fix them up, and had to live in them for five years. Why hasn't it been revived?
This is a critical issue. I've read enough of Paul Wilham to know that he'd be an excellent representative to give the side of housing proponents. Why are we allowing this city to underfund something so critical?
^^ Gail F, the City will still sell houses to end-users for $1. However, they have to own them first.
I wrote about this issue today on my blog. I really think the time has come for the residents of Westwood to take bold steps, and resort to Public Embarrassment of the Mayor, the Council and city officials if that is what it takes to get them to come to a table and start addressing these issues.Right now they seem to have deaf ear and maybe its time to wake them up!
Post a Comment