Losing Springfield

[avs]

How much in property taxes have restored Springfield homes brought the city in property taxes, huh?

^Love that!  Heck if the city put 1% of the property taxes it has collected since all of us began renovating in Springfield and bringing the property values up they would have more than enough to mothball the empty homes!  Then they wouldn't have to dip into FEDERAL money to demo homes in a National Historic District, which is illegal and should really be looked into

[sheclown]

It's a strange thing.  This neighborhood is not asking the city to spend any additional money here.  It is only asking the city NOT to demolish the houses.  If it must stabilize for public safety, then stabilize and mothball as required by ordinance (which is ultimately cheaper than demolition). 

And not to use the "public safety" line -- really...the city was going to invest federal dollars to beautifully restore 253 East 2nd.  What sort of "public safety" emergency was that? 

So many groups, so many people have their hands out to the city.  We have our hands UP.  Stop.  Period. Go away.

Tragically, this neighborhood was targeted for NSP funds.  $400k for demolition along with other areas in 32206.  This is doing EXACTLY what HUD does not want to happen.  Using the federal dollars, regardless of the outcome, just to spend them.

This will bite Jacksonville in the ass.  And it ain't just the dreamer in me saying that.

[mbwright]

Dear Jacksonville, a house that is stable, or restored will be worth more, and bring in more property taxes, than a vacant lot.  neighbor hoods that have home, and not vacant lots will with worth more than those with a few houses here and there.

The minimal cost to properly do your job, would save the city a ton of money.

[ChriswUfGator]

You're a licensed CBC aren't you Gloria?

[iloveionia]

Springfield continues to be an unnecessary victim of Code Enforcement, all they do is push forward a line of crap and expect people to be okay with it.  Kimberly Scott goes out of her way to bully Springfield and unfortunately has been given the power to do what she deems necessary to "keep the public safe." 

I once thought (just prior to buying in 2007) that NO WAY could a historic home be demolished.  NO WAY.  Well, we all know how that thought panned out.  Virtually the opposite. 

No one EVER asked code to rehab homes.  EVER.  Simply take the least intrusive means possible, save the tax payers some dollars, protect the historic homes of our hood, and work to build a tax base.  A vacant lot marred with liens and fines does not do that. 

[sheclown]

yes Chris.

[sheclown]

Springfield continues to be an unnecessary victim of Code Enforcement, all they do is push forward a line of crap and expect people to be okay with it.  Kimberly Scott goes out of her way to bully Springfield and unfortunately has been given the power to do what she deems necessary to "keep the public safe." 

I once thought (just prior to buying in 2007) that NO WAY could a historic home be demolished.  NO WAY.  Well, we all know how that thought panned out.  Virtually the opposite. 

No one EVER asked code to rehab homes.  EVER.  Simply take the least intrusive means possible, save the tax payers some dollars, protect the historic homes of our hood, and work to build a tax base.  A vacant lot marred with liens and fines does not do that. 

And furthermore, there is a line between policy and ordinance that is too often crossed. Ordinance has gone through the public hearing process and been voted on by elected officials.  Policy does not.

It is by city ordinance that these homes be protected.  It is by policy that these homes are demolished.

[ChriswUfGator]

yes Chris.

So you, a licensed CBC who inspected the house, gives an estimate of what's needed to correct what code is concerned over, and rather than thanking you for your time (which you donated) some random council person is emailing that you need LensCrafters based on some bad quality exterior photos code showed? Really? Why bother even having a meeting, it seems the conclusion was predetermined.

[strider]

PSOS did a public records request for this property along with 129 East 2nd Street.  Although it took awhile, we did get the records this week.  We were hoping to get some info on what MetroNorth was planning to do with the property.  Those records are there.

Additionally, there is this lovely nugget.





FWIW, I was that "attendee".

Additonally, for what it is worth, the city spent in excess of $10k to demolish.  Removing that front gable over the porch, or bracing it, would have been significantly less than $10k.

However, the flip disregard for historic properties shown by Crescimbeni, is quite alarming as well.

Hes an ass more than half the time.  He has funny comments though. Assy but funny.

Just to set the record straight, the $ 1,000.00 quoted to "brace the structure" was not for the entire structure but an amount to brace only the remains of the front porch gable.  Ms. Scott is either badly mistaken or being purposely misleading in her e-mail to a councilman. In the engineering report ordered by Ms Scott and paid for by us tax payers, the only thing that was considered an emergency and imminent threat by the professional engineering firm was the front porch gable, not the main house.  Bracing it at $ 1,000.00 seems a bit more sensible that paying the about $11,000.00 for the demolition and the potential lawsuit the city is now facing. 

The city is closing libraries, complaining about budget shortfalls and yet the Mayors office is allowing a paid employee make decisions that cost the city many times what they should and puts the city on the hook for potentially hundreds of thousands in legal liabilities. Remember that while the funding for the actually demolition may have been from NSP funding, the resulting liabilities, put at above $200,000.00 each based on previous financial records from similar lawsuits, would be directly from us tax payers not any kind of federal funding.

And to think that Ms Scott and others are trying to say we are the ones out of touch with reality.

[avs]

@ChrisWufGator: A council member and Code Enforcement Director who neither one are GC's and do NOT have the qualifications to make assessments as to cost and feasibility to correct this home's issues.  They are the ones who need lenses, and GC licenses.  They are both speaking beyond their paygrade

[mbwright]

There should certainly be some sort of burden of proof required, for each and every action that is made.  Once every avenue has been evaluated, then proceed.  Willy nilly 'it's an emergency' is not the way to do it.  I'd love to give Ms. Scott a performance review.  Seems like she is the Governor's evil twin....

[iloveionia]

It is by city ordinance that these homes be protected.  It is by policy that these homes are demolished.

And this policy is created by Kim Scott, Chief of Code Enforcement.  She, and only she, gets to make crucial decisions about our neighborhood and as Stider continually states, our tax dollars. 

Her latest policy is to revisit condemned and at risk homes in Springfield now every three months.  Previously it was every six months.  Why the ants in the pants?  What does she have against Springfield?  Who is whispering in her ear?  Something else awry?  Nothing ever seems to line up. 

As stated earlier.  Leave us alone. 

[wsansewjs]

Is there a way to remove Ms. Scott from her position?

-Josh

PS- Hello and back from the hiatus status.

[fsujax]

Yes, is she appointed?

[strider]

Ms Scott serves at the pleasure of the Mayor, I believe.  So there should be one of those letters of resignation already in a file.