Members of the Derby Board of Aldermen balked Thursday at putting a property owned by one of their own on the city’s blight list.
First Ward Alderman Stephen Iacuone owns the multi-family house in question, at 40 Gilbert St.
He says the root of his problem is poor drainage, which results in massive flooding on the street and has damaged his property.
But the city’s blight officer, Andrew Cota, says the Aldermen’s “hand’s off” approach to 40 Gilbert St. creates a perception that the Aldermen are giving “special privilege” to a city official.
Drainage, Floods
Iacuone’s property has been badly damaged from a long-standing drainage problem stemming from the Witek Park reservoir. Iacuone and his neighbors get massive amounts of water on their properties when it rains.
The drainage problem has been an issue for years. The city’s drainage system from the reservoir to Gilbert Street needs to be rebuilt.
However, the city needs to go onto private properties to get the job done and they’ve been having a heck of a time getting easements to do so, according to an August article published in the New Haven Register.
In about 2007, Iacuone moved out of his house at 40 Gilbert St. due to the flooding issues. The home is currently vacant.
While the city negotiates with residents — including Iacuone — in an attempt to find a permanent fix to the failed drainage system, Iacuone’s property has become an eyesore.
The yard is wildly overgrown, glass is missing from some windows, there are gutters lying in a heap outside the front door, the exterior paint is chipped and cracked and the roof needs work.
Article continues after the photo:
No Action
A recommendation to add it to the city’s blight list was given to a subcommittee of the Board of Aldermen — but the subcommittee tabled the recommendation several months ago.
Traditionally, the Aldermen’s subcommittee makes a recommendation to the full Board of Aldermen, which then votes on whether to put the property on the blight list.
Properties on the city’s blight list could be subject to fines if the issues are not addressed.
Cota Weighs In
Cota, the former Derby police chief, is the city’s part-time blight enforcement officer.
On Nov. 14, Cota sent an e-mail to Aldermanic President Ken Hughes. In the e-mail, Cota pointed out that 40 Gilbert St. has been in its current condition for at least four years.
Cota said he was concerned about the perception of “special privilege to one of their own.”
Cota indicated that if the Aldermen did not act on the matter one way or the other, he would resign his position with the city.
He also said that during a recent hearing on a different property the city had declared blighted, that property owner brought photos of 40 Gilbert St. and questioned why nothing was done.
Cota’s e-mail did not contain names, but the Valley Indy learned Cota was referencing Robert Vontell, Jr., who owns a multi-family house at 46-48 Fifth St. that has been on the blight list for some time.
Unfair?
Vontell said he has been accumulating fines of $100 per day for some five to six months.
Vontell said he is at the point where the property is becoming worthless to him due to the amount of fines against him and the amount of money he’s spent trying to improve the place.
His last blight hearing — an administrative hearing in Derby City Hall — happened about four months ago.
Before the hearing, Vontell said he took photographs of properties in Derby that looked like they were in worse condition that his Fifth Street apartment house, but were not on the city’s blight list.
The chief “offender,” according to Vontell — 40 Gilbert St.
“Anybody with eyes can see that place is a pile of (expletive deleted),” Vontell said.
At his blight hearing, Vontell was not able to introduce 40 Gilbert St. as evidence, he said.
Vontell said he didn’t know it was owned by an elected official until the Valley Indy told him on Friday.
“It makes me angry,” Vontell said. “They are selective about who they put on the list.”
Confrontation
Hughes said Cota’s e-mail prompted him to put the property on the agenda of the Board of Aldermen’s meeting Thursday.
Things got testy when Iacuone’s property came up for discussion.
Alderman Barbara DeGennaro asked for permission to speak to the Board of Alderman not in her elected capacity, but as Alderman Iacuone’s attorney. No one objected.
DeGennaro questioned why the matter was being put in front of the full Board of Aldermen without the Aldermen’s subcommittee weighing in.
“I think that it was pushed because it has become a political issue and it should not become a political issue,” DeGennaro said.
DeGennaro and Iacuone are the only Democrats on the Board of Aldermen. That changes in December, when DeGennaro and Iacuone will be joined by three more Democrats who won seats on the board during the Nov. 8 election.
David Lenart, a Republican Alderman and a member of the Aldermen subcommittee that did not take action on Iacuone’s property, also questioned why the Aldermen were going to act on 40 Gilbert St. without input from the subcommittee.
“The process is to go to the subcommittee,” Lenart said.
Alderman Jay Benanto, a Republican, agreed with Lenart.
However, Joseph Coppola, Derby’s corporation counsel, pointed out the blight law does not require input from a subcommittee.
Hughes said the matter was brought to the Board of Aldermen because of Cota’s email.
“In my opinion, by not adding this to the blight list, we are jeopardizing the whole blight program,” Hughes said.
DeGennaro and Iacuone pointed out that they did not receive copies of Cota’s e-mail, while other Aldermen did.
Here is video from the exchange between members of the Derby Board of Aldermen. Article continues after the clip.
Extenuating Circumstances?
Iacuone’s case may be somewhat different than the average blight case due to the fact he’s claiming the root of his problem was caused by the city’s failure to address drainage problems in his neighborhood.
DeGennaro said Friday Iacuone has been trying to negotiate with Derby to keep the drainage issue out of the courts. She did not want to get into the details of those discussions, citing attorney-client privilege. Part of the discussion has included Iacuone selling his land to Derby.
Aldermen meeting minutes show that Derby was willing to pay Iacuone money for easements to his land to make drainage repairs — but the city didn’t have enough money to tear down Iacuone’s house.
Those negotiations have been going on for some eight years, Iacuone said during Thursday’s Aldermen meeting.
“You’re putting me in a predicament where the city is remiss in their storm water flows, causing damage to my property, and you’re going to put me on the blight list, basically strong-arming me into doing something with the city? I don’t think that’s fair,” he said.
Alderman Joe Bomba called DeGennaro’s legal representation of Iacuone a conflict of interest.
“I’ve never seen an attorney jump up to defend a member of the Board of Aldermen,” he said. “There is a serious conflict of interest there.”
DeGennaro said Friday she always recuses herself from discussions involving clients and that she always points out when she is speaking as Iacuone’s attorney.
In The End, No Action
After the brief dust up, the Aldermen did not decide whether to add Iacuone’s property to the blight list.
Instead, they voted to send it back, again, to a subcommittee.
Six Aldermen voted to send it back. DeGennaro and Iacuone recused themselves from the vote.
Bomba voted against it, saying Iacuone’s case should be handled through the blight process, just like anyone else in the city.
I just want to add my worthless two cents:
I do not think these two properties, or any property, ought to be on a blight list. The individual in this country ought to possess a relatively iron clad right to property. All of our political rights (save the right to life, which is paramount) rest on our fundamental right to mix our hands with the soil or other resources we own, and own the result of our labor. Our entire economic system (which is not all THAT bad, at least at the level of small business and family enterprise) is based on this concept.
The inevitable result of having a blight list in ANY city or town is corruption. The well connected who can explain their circumstances well to city officials will be given a pass, while those who are not well connected (usually the poor) will be made to suffer.
There is another adequate remedy to the problem of blight, and that is the courts. If I can prove that the condition of a neighbor’s property has hurt me financially, then I should be able to sue for redress in civil court if speaking with the owner personally hasn’t worked. If, however, I cannot make such a case, then it is clear that my neighbor’s property is not negatively effecting me in any way. Why should I have a “right” not to see someone’s property look unkempt? Such a notion is silly, and often has been wielded by city officials against certain demographic groups as a tool to aid in gentrification (and this has implications in terms of economic and racial justice which are very concerning). In fact, Derby is facing a lawsuit right now for such unjust actions.
As a resident of Derby I just want to speak out and say I do not support the blight ordinance, nor do I support the heavy handed (and thus far entirely futile) attempts to “remake” our downtown according to the dictates of some central planner, no matter how well-intentioned.
Clearly, the two situations of blight are not similar. Iacuone has a problem because the city refuses to work with him. An unfortunate political issue that will surely cost the Derby resident$ more money when a lawsuit is filed and won. Work with the guy for crying out loud! And give the other guy a break ti rectify his problems without breaking his bank. Like his property is bringing down the home values of Anson Steeet. Laughable. Imagine if this administration was fines for the downtown blight. Yes, Main Street looks like utopia haha. Joe Bomba, give it up. It’s obvious your opinions never mattered, nor do they now. Stop being a sore loser from this last election and just go away.
The city drainage problem — appears to have made this — “a political football.” City officials appear split, in trying to provide a remedy. They have put Blight Officer Andrew Cota — in “between a rock. and a hard place,”
in his efforts to do his job.
Actually the former chief placed himself in the position, no one else, by alleging preferential treatment by the alderman for one of their own and trying to pressure the alderman to act by threatening to resign if they didn’t
There are obviously extenuating circumstances related to the condition of the property and the city’s culpability for that condition, which is the reason for the city’s inaction at listing the property as blighted.
Interestingly it would appear that the Hughes and Bomba were attempting to circumvent the established process / protocol which has been in place and used in the past try to embarrass their Democrat colleague.
Hats off to their fellow Republicans who wouldn’t participate in the nasty side of politics. Such chicanery should make for an interesting two years with Democrat majorities on all the major boards and commissions. Is this the kind of sour grapes / political nonsense residents of Derby can expect from those remaining Republicans who are no longer in control of these boards?
Walt Mayhew: You, and Marc Garofalo — continue ro use this issue as “a political football” by blaming Republicans, who everyone knows — both of you dislike. Election Day has passed. Try to enjoy the holidays. Peace!