ATTENTION: Longton Council Meeting Wednesday March 8th

[CCarl]

Come one, come all, to see Longton earn its new reputation of a community that encourages families to rat on their neighbors. To get that reference, read or reread the WARNING Under Attack post about City Ordinance 423.

One of the agenda items Wednesday will be a Resolution to start condemnation proceedings on the old haunted house property on Kansas Avenue, using Ordinance 423. This action must mean that enough rats in town signed the petition at the cafe to support the Mayor's angst over her perception of blight.

Here is what will unfold. Five city circus council members will vote to declare a building structurally unsafe and hazardous, or not. None of them are structural engineers. None of them are licensed contractors. Yet, they will act as authorities. The City Enforcement Officer holds that title in name only, also lacking any professional training, professional experience, or certification to inspect buildings.

Have any of the circus council members been inside the building in question? I do not know. But, if they have, they committed criminal trespass to do so. I know the owner has not given anyone permission to be on the property without the owner's presence.

So they will vote without seeing the building in question. Well, that is not good, but since they are not professionally qualified to determine what a solid structure is, they probably would not know what they were looking at. So circus [not sure why my fingers keep typing that] council members do not hold any professional opinion about the building, they hold only personal opinions.

How about the property owner's opinion? Well, the property owner also happens to be a licensed professional contractor. He will be the only one in the room with a professional opinion about the building. He has said to me that the building in question has better 'bones' (foundation and framing) than half the occupied homes in town [that he has been in]. We can all see it needs a roof, some windows, and siding work, but the framework is sound. It does not need to be torn down. It is not a hazard. It just fits the Mayor's vision of blight.

The WARNING Under Attack post used the term 'decency' regarding the act of people respecting their neighbors and leaving them to their own lives. Let us see how many decent people come to the council [there, got it] meeting on Wednesday. Let's see how decently its members vote.

Any bets?

[upoladeb]

i hope lots of people use this opportunity to get more involvedin their city government.The house on the highway that got the windows taken out so they can stop paying taxes looks worse than the haunted house

[upoladeb]

How did things go at the meeting?Did anyone go?

[CCarl]

I didn't go to the meeting, but heard the vote was 4 Yeas and 1 Nay to condemn the building. City Council has losts its marbles, along with ANY concern for our private property Rights. It is time for wholesale changes in the next election cycle, IMO.

Who knows what will follow. The owner could sell the building, and the City's play would have to start over. Or the owner could sue the City.

Some five years ago a Maggard family owned the property on the southeast corner of 5th and Delaware. The City hated the used trailer that came on the property after a previous trailer burned. So did some of the neighbor busy bodies. Maggards refused to co-operate and ended up in Municipal Court, as I recall. They refused to co-operate in Court too, and oddly, nothing came from whatever Court decrees were made, because the property owner blew the Court off. That bit of info came to me from the previous City Mayor. Then the property was sold, and the City immediately turned its claws on the new owner with more mandates. Maybe the best approach is to ignore the City. Seemed to work a few years ago. I wonder why?

Here may be why. Hopefully there are readers out there who remember Rex Crowell. He owned the old bank building on the southeast corner of 5th and Kansas for years. I talked with him frequently at the gas station, back about 2014/2015, when it was still open for business. He said the City had been fecklessly threatening him for years to clean the building up. He just watched the roof collapse, and told the City he'd sue it, if it tried any legal action. The City never did a thing, except threaten to act. Rex was an attorney, and one in good standing. He knew the law, so he knew what the City could and could not do. Apparently Rex understood the City lacked jurisdiction.

Hard to tell what might happen in Municipal Court nowdays, the Judge and City Attorney may be different people, and may try to rule differently. One never knows how a legal opinion may be used to bully. BUT, Longton needs more people like Rex. It needs more people to take a stand. Were the property mine, I would sue. I hope a few others would too.