'They're walking the street looking for trouble'

Code and Ordinances committee members David Walker, Tom Abbott and David Gates during Thursday night's sometimes heated discussion. (City of Rochester video image)

ROCHESTER - Thursday night's Neighborhood Compliance discussion may have been moved to the Nov. 20 meeting, but that didn't stop the Codes and Ordinance committee from having a lively debate that centered around an 85-year-old city woman on Social Security who had been cited by Code Enforcement for a little peeling paint and a few cuffed shingles.

Steve Beaudoin, R-Strafford District H9, may have helped stoke the conversation during public input, when he brought up the plight of the woman, who he said was very upset when she was cited by code enforcement.

"She is not in a financial position to replace her roof, she's on Social Security," said Beaudoin, who is working on state legislation that would mandate all code issues be enacted at the state level.

Beaudoin said going into a single family home and citing people for some peeling paint or "saying they need a larger egress window" is "over the top."

He urged the board to get the full City Council involved in the vetting of these regulations.

He also urged a need for a "back and forth public hearing" where constituents and council members can discuss the matter more fully.

"The property maintenance code needs help," he added. "We can't be picking on people who can't afford it," he said.

Most of the Codes and Ordinances Committee agreed, led by David Walker, who said sending teams of code enforcement officers into neighborhoods to cite residents was "obnoxious."

"That's not a good image for the city," he said.

Board member Elaine Lauterborn agreed, ripping the neighborhood compliance initiative, adding, "They're walking the street looking for trouble. Why are we bothering the people who are doing the best they can?"

Board member Robert Gates was even more irate, seeking a vote by the board to advise City Council to order code enforcement to "cease and decease" the practice immediately till further notice.

"Property maintenance codes are being used as a weapon, not a tool," he fumed. "What is this City Council going to do to mitigate this problem now, stop it for the time being?"

Codes and Ordinance Chair Peter Lachapelle cautioned against a vote, saying it was premature since a presentation by Code Enforcement that was supposed to happen on Thursday was postponed till Nov. 20 and that the committee should wait till then.

Much of the discussion centered philosophically on whether the city should have a complaint-based method of singling out code compliance offenders or the "proactive" neighborhood approach where code enforcement actually walk the streets looking for residences that do not comply with city ordinance.

Throughout the discussion the plight of the elderly woman with some chipped paint and cuffed shingles resurfaced as many sought to drive home the unseemliness of such a policy.

One of the architects of the proactive neighborhood compliance initiative, Building, Zoning and Licensing Director Jim Grant, said on Wednesday that he favored the neighborhood approach vs. the former "complaint" approach, because so often the complaints arose between neighbors who had grudges against each other.

"By going neighborhood by neighborhood you don't get selective about it," he said. "It's more fair."

Still, even Grant on Wednesday acknowledged there would be some blowback.

Earlier in the meeting the board voted to kill in committee any additional amendment to the city's taxi licensing structure, which means any ride sharing entities - to include Uber drivers - will have to pay city taxi licensing fees if they want to pick up fares in the city.