Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Oswego Provides Another Parallel Universe for Watertown Issues

       There's a lot of insight into the issue of  dilapidated rental property from following the debate in nearby Oswego where the new mayor, Billy Barlow, is proposing  a blitz against what he calls slum lords. This includes hiring two additional codes officers, and dramatically raising rental registration fees now charged.
       Common Council is considering the Mayor's proposals, but he seems to be taking off after property owners in an aggresive manner.  Of course demagoguery has it's up and down sides.
      Point is, there is nothing unique or unusual about the issue as it plays out in Watertown and the new Oswego Mayor is actually willing and able to propose and implement policies that seem mired in bureacracy elsewhere.
      What is also evident is these unit registration fees, now at $30 will rise, according to the Mayor, as the administrative cost is actually more than twice that.


Anonymous said...

Does Oswego have an unelected NFP/agency and bureaucratic shadow government, who stole their tax dollars and trash dollars, and misappropriated those dollars to subsidize competition outside of its borders, while actually engaging in competition with private landlords, as well? Are those same unelected overpaid shadow govenrment bureaucratic competitors, the ones who are pulling the strings and advocating for this law? If not, then the parallel is askew.

Anonymous said...

Councilman Jennings has said that most cities in New York State have landlord registration. I had no idea about this as I am not a landlord. But from someone I know, in a lot of cities you have to fill out a form and pay a fee to be a landlord. These fees are not only proposed to be increased in Oswego, but in Syracuse and other cities as well. This is done to cover the cost of Code Enforcement offices.
If the proposed registration law is passed, either taxes will have to be increased to pay for the cost of a much larger code enforcement office. A fee to be a landlord will follow "registration". Random visits and reported abuses will undoubtedly increase along with the size of Code enforcement staff. Most likely the Code Enforcement Office will be housed in a separate building that will have to be built.
It seems that a lot of talk on this issues has concerned the "appearance" of residences, whether owned by landords or privately owned. I have always assumed that citizens here could behave as they will so long as it does not ENDANGER THE LIFE OR SAFETY OF OTHERS.
Any law that goes beyond that, I think is unconstitutional.
Even so called "garbage" in front of residences has to be distinguished from mere litter. And is the "garbage" an imminent danger to the health of nearby people? If so, watch your wastebaskets at work too. How far will CD Officers take this?
Employers hate OSHA for some times going too far. Does Code Enforcement do this too?

Anonymous said...

It is hard to make market forces to determine quality housing of an area when the housing available is overbuilt. When new quality housing is readily available to a higher than average wage population, the less than desirable housing is bound to exist. Those who have low income do not have a choice where they can live if much of this less than desirable housing costs even more than that which is subsidized, but unavailable to them. If the less desirable housing is even further limited due to code restrictions and/or violations, then the market becomes more and more restricted to those with little or no income.
This seems to be the case in the Military/Camp Town of Watertown and the surrounding area.
Using law to further increase code violations has NOT changed the habits of poor or working poor people anywhere I know of. It has merely forced them from the sight of those who do not want to see their poorly maintained homes.
It is better to provide more buying power and increased wages to increase standards of living between the affluent and the poor to improve the status of an entire local society.
Attempts to force change of behaviors usually has resulted in conflicts between governments and citizens. We should avoid sowing such seeds.

Anonymous said...

4:16, the "poor" have more buying power than the middle class had just 15 years ago. They choose to spend the money on groceries and subs at the convenience stores, tattoos, beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

Why do you think we need to coddle people and make sure they have no holes in their homes? People actually go out in the woods and sleep in tents for entertainment. Lewis and Clark spent their days in less than code compliant dwellings. So did General Washington when he was fighting for your freedom (so you could take it away from others today).

Grow up. Suck it up. Life isn't perfect. Try to enjoy it anyway.

Anonymous said...

8:34 You need to cite specific , validated sources of data supporting your statements please , OTHERWISE your screed is typical right wing bullshit that deserves no attention .

Anonymous said...

@8:34 PM

Exactly , I am tired of this too.
They have money for everything else, even better or leased cars. as the average working person. A lot of elderly or disabled homeowners and /or veterans can not afford to renovate their homes and have to live with and do not complain and nobody helps them.

Oh I forgot, you have to be druggie, never have a job or money because of it and a couple of times in jail because of this , then you get to renovate your house for free, roof, windows, heat and all.

We the average people who are retired and paid taxes all our lives , must have done some thing wrong.