Dying Longton Part Two: Longton Bullies A Property Owner

[CCarl]

Longton Bullies A Property Owner               

A few years back the current County Sheriff approached me with a petition for his election. His opening statement was that he understood people in the County liked to be left alone, and that, as Sheriff, he would leave them alone. I don't know if he has, or not, but I agreed with him. My question to Forum readers is, when is the Longton City government going to understand that people want to be left alone?

I plan on reviewing City Ordinances in several later posts, but Ordinance 439 is now being imposed on a family I know. That ordinance was rushed through City Council in the spring of 2019 when a trailer at 502 Delaware burned, and the property owners legally moved a used trailer on-site. Neighbors whined to City Hall about another used trailer, giving the Council reason (not legality) to move forward to limit a property owner's Rights, pending the City's approval. The Ordinance has questionable legal standing that I will discuss later.

The current issue is a friend has acquired a trailer and needs to move it about two hundred feet, from another property to his. The City Ordinance demands a fee and a permit so he can relocate the trailer. The permit will not be issued if the trailer is not in 'good and safe' condition, and complies with all other ordinances. Read Ordinance 439, it is here; https://media.rainpos.com/816/439_mobile_homes.pdf

That ordinance sounds to me like trailer homes, mobile homes, modular homes, and manufactured homes are no longer private property, unless they are brand-spankin' new. Since when did a used home, because it came to town on wheels, become public property? It did not, and city property owners need to draw a line in the sand and make the City back off.

Back to the issue at hand. The trailer my friend wants to move was vacated in October 2020 when the family moved out of state. At the time they moved the trailer was livable. It has been vacant since then. When the minus twenty nights came in January water lines in the trailer broke. I noticed water running out of the trailer about four days after the deep freeze let up. I went to shut the water off at the meter. I couldn't shut it off because the City had a padlock on it. A neighbor called the City, it removed the padlock, turned the water valve off, then relocked it.

My issue is, why did the City lock the water ON when the property was vacated, rather than lock it OFF? If it had been turned off, then locked, the trailer might not have had broken pipes, but definitely would not have flooded. As it stands today, all the subfloor has buckled and been weakened by the flooding that occurred. I hold the City liable for the flood damage because it failed to shut off the water when the property was vacated.

And now, because of the flood damage, the City will do its best to bully the new trailer owner, declare the trailer unsafe, and deny him a permit. Now, just why should he need a permit in the first place, only because a misguided ordinance says so? This one is entirely on you, City government. Revoke Ordinance 439. Stop the big bully tactics! Like the sheriff-to-be said, we like to be left alone. Do as he said. It is our property, not public property. We need to act locally to stop the intrusion into our private lives.

[upoladeb]

it sure dont make sense to lock a turned on water meter.

[CCarl]

No doubt, it was an unintentional screw-up. I won't be holding my breath, but I expect an honest government to pay for the damages its misdeeds have caused. We'll see how honest Longton's government is.