Title
Appeal of Special Tax Assessment for 382 Curtice St E. for Project #: J1104A, Assessment #: 118995 in Ward 2
Property Address 382 Curtice St E
Legislative Hearing Officer Recommendation
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from $476 to $238.
Tax Assessment Worksheet
Cost: $344.00
Service Charge: $140.00
Total Assessment: $476.00
Gold Card Returned by:
Type of Order/Fee: Summary Abatement
Nuisance: remove all tires, household items, scrap wood/metal, broken recycling bins, general debris
Date of Orders: August 30, 2010
Compliance Date: September 3, 2010
Re-Check Date: September 7, 2010
Date Work Done: 09/15/2010: Done By Parks
Work Order #: PA 10-895309
Returned Mail?: No
Comments: VB File opened on 8/30/10 (Cat 1) and closed on 11/18/10
History of Orders on Property: None
Legislative Hearing Officer Recommendation
Ms. Moermond recommends the Clean-Up fee be divided in half to $238 and the Vacant Building fee deleted.
STAFF PRESENT: Inspectors Paula Seeley, Joe Yannarelly and Joel Essling, Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI); and Leanna Schaff, DSI - Fire; Mai Vang and Jean Birkholz, Council Research
Abel Grassi Queti appeared.
Clean-Up and Vacant Building (for less than 3 months) fees
Inspector Yannarelly reported that the clean-up was for removing all tires, household items, scrap wood/metal, broken recycling bins and general debris. The Summary Abatement Order was issued on August 30, 2010 with a compliance date of September 3, 2010, it was re-checked on September 7, 2010 and found in non-compliance. A Work Order was sent to Parks and the work was performed on September 15, 2010 at a cost of $344 plus a service charge of $140 for a total of $476. There was no returned mail. The property was a Vacant Building from August 30, 2010 (Category 1) and was closed on November 18, 2010. There is no history of Orders on the property.
Ms. Moermond asked the appellant, Mr. Queti, why he is appealing the assessment. Mr. Queti responded that he wants to know what was cleaned-up and and why the building was assessed as a Vacant Building. Ms. Moermond asked to view the video of the external clean-up.
Mr. Queti stated that he never got a notice; also, there was very little they picked-up plus they took his recycling bin and a piece of wood that he could have used. The house was not vacant; it just didn't have renters at that time. Ms. Moermond noted that the City sent a letter to the right address and they did not get any mail returned. Mr. Queti explained that the only thing he has received from the City was the gold card for the appeal of the vacant building. Inspector Yannarelly asked him if he received any revocation letters from the Certificate of Occupancy Program. Mr. Queti replied, "No." He knew that is was a vacant building when he went back to the property and saw the stickers; he went back another day and saw another set of stickers. Mr. Queti also talked with the Fire Inspector Sean, who said he didn't know why the stickers were on the property. The house wasn't vacant, just empty because there were no renters at that time. The bills have been paid every month; there was running water and heat. Sean went back and made an inspection and found a couple of minor things wrong which he fixed right away. Inspector Yannarelly stated that the Certificate of Occupancy Program people referred the building to the Vacant Building Program that's why it was on the list for a short period of time. Sean is the person who sent the Revocation Letters (3).
Ms. Moermond continued to say that the materials picked-up had not been stored properly. Even though it wasn't a particularly big problem, it was illegal storage. All of that needs to be inside a building.
Ms. Moermond recommended that the Vacant Building fee be deleted and the clean-up cost be divided in half.