There’s more harmony between town officials and residents with pending changes to the town’s anti-blight ordinance on paper.
Several proposed changes to the town’s blight document were unveiled Tuesday prior to the Board of Selectmen meeting.
The draft document was prepared since last week’s ordinance committee meeting where residents complained about the unfairness of the rules.
Proposed amendments include tightening the definition of blight as adversely affecting “the economic well being of the Town and is inimical to the health, safety and welfare of its residents.”
Other proposed changes would require all complaints to be submitted through a complaint form with their names included rather than through anonymous phone calls; having blight enforcement officers contact would-be violators and ask them to correct the violation or give them a verbal or written warning to take corrective action, and that a blight complaint for the same issue at the same residence will not be accepted for six months.
Proposed penalties would be $5 to $100 per day as opposed to $100 in the current ordinance.
Residents have complained about the current rules, saying that they have been subjected to numerous anonymous blight complaints by neighbors.
The Board of Selectmen will host a public hearing on Sept. 1 to discuss the proposed amendments to the anti-blight rules.
Selectman John Putorti, a member of the ordinance committee, hopes the proposed changes will put an end to baseless complaints.
“I hope we’ve eliminated the Hatfields vs. McCoys issue,” Putorti said. Blight complaints “should be for the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the town. I think we’ve made a good working document.”
First Selectman Robert Koskelowski credited residents and blight officers Alex Danka and Howard Simpson for working on the proposed modifications. Danka said the proposed rules are more thorough and will help he and Simpson to do their jobs.
Resident Sean Walsh, who had complained that someone filed a blight complaint against him because they had an axe to grind, praised the recommendations as being “a lot more fair” than the current rules.
“It’s much better. They put a lot of language in. Everyone that had a complaint pretty much was dealt with,” he said. “Everyone that had a suggestion was at least considered.”
