City August 7, 2012 10:30 AM

City needs to put Housing Court fines out to collection

Buffalo Rising 36

BRO submission by Fred Brace - Buffalo NY:

Jim Heaney, a former reporter for the Buffalo News and now the editor of the "The Investigative Post" recently presented a three part series for WGRZ - Ch.2 on the City of Buffalo's uncollected Housing Court fines which go back to 2006. Whatever the final figure is that is uncollected, as pointed out ranging from 12 to 22 million dollars, the fact that very little if any has been collected is inexcusable.

Buffalo NY is third poorest city of its size in the USA and any portion of that money collected could go a long way in helping out. As a member of the City of Buffalo Housing Court, serving as a Housing Court Liaison at the pleasure and direction of Judge Patrick Carney, I have a very good idea of where these monies could be utilized. One of the key City Departments that could benefit is the City of Buffalo's Permits and Inspections Department. Besides the obvious need for more personnel, whose ranks were gutted under previous administrations, this money could be used to upgrade their reporting to 21st Century standards so that reporting in the 311 Citistat System would be totally transparent to whomever put in the request for inspection.

As of now there is absolutely no way to follow a housing case through the court system. Also, monies that are collected by the Rental Registry Department are, by law, supposed to go to Permits and Inspections but are currently being put into the general fund for the City of Buffalo and are not earmarked for the Inspections Department. Building Inspectors in the city have a thankless job and are inundated by numerous frivolous complaints that must be answered to satisfy the rules set up for CitiStat. This was not the express purpose for CitiStat but something it has morphed into over the past few years to camouflage poor performance in a cloud of meaningless numbers.

The City of Buffalo desperately needs to put all of these fines out to collection, through a professional collection agency, and benefit from whatever dollars it can collect. Mark Schroder, the City of Buffalo Comptroller, needs to insure that this process takes place immediately and that its results are completely transparent.... nothing else should be accepted by the citizens of Buffalo.

View image

Comments

36 Comments Leave a comment

Polonia

August 7, 2012 10:38 AM

Ya gotta hit deadbeats where it hurts.

[ Reply ]

Score: 6 ( 6 votes )

crescent1251

August 7, 2012 1:40 PM

Most of the property owners do not live in these properties. A small portion of collected fines or property liens would cover any addition personal and administrative costs.
I don't understand way this city will not gets some balls and do what has to be done whether its two foot tall front lawns, property owners encouraging graffiti on their buildings in a historical preservation area to promote a sale, unenforced building codes, etc.
Oh and lastly do not use these additional collected funds as a new city/county cash cow. Invest in city upkeep as mentioned earlier.

[ Reply ]

replied to Polonia

Score: 7 ( 11 votes )

fill

August 7, 2012 3:51 PM

Are you talking about City Hall ?

[ Reply ]

replied to Polonia

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

fill

August 7, 2012 3:52 PM

Are you talking about City Hall ?

[ Reply ]

replied to Polonia

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

nickinthebox

August 7, 2012 10:46 AM

you would think with the bustling collections business in WNY, someone would jump all over this...

[ Reply ]

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

Pegger

August 10, 2012 2:06 AM

Buffalo is becoming known as a collections city ever since that one crook was exposed on a national magazine show which I believe was "60 Minutes." Looked to me like the industry is centered in the Larkin District. I welcome any clarifications.

[ Reply ]

replied to nickinthebox

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

peripatetic

August 7, 2012 11:04 AM

Right on Fred. Along with being able to follow housing court cases, it would be advantageous for the public to be able to follow criminal cases through the court system.
An informed public can make Buffalo and WNY a better place to live.

[ Reply ]

Score: 6 ( 6 votes )

ByronBrownsTie

August 7, 2012 11:50 AM

Yea, that's a great idea. Because people ALWAYS answer the phone for creditors.

[ Reply ]

Score: -1 ( 7 votes )

burbsarenotbuffalo

August 7, 2012 12:06 PM

There is a simple solution- what happens if you let a parking ticket or other fine go unanswered? they suspend your license and/or registration.

The city needs to partner with the County clerks office and tie the fines to vehicle registration and licenses. It has been tried in other cities (Rochester is one of them, I believe) and it has been fairly successful.

Collections agencies will only cost money and produce minimal returns.

[ Reply ]

Score: 9 ( 11 votes )

ByronBrownsTie

August 7, 2012 1:03 PM

These people don't have cars...most of them take the bus. You're not thinking like a deadbeat -- which is what you need to be doing to combat this solution.

Now -- if you were to suggest that we apply that same theory to their EBT Cards, where they wouldn't be reloaded until these fines were resolved, I'd say you were on to something.

[ Reply ]

replied to burbsarenotbuffalo

Score: -3 ( 13 votes )

JMc44113

August 7, 2012 12:29 PM

Ironic this article appears today yet only yesterday Buffalo Rising supported the illegal installation of grafitti-like advertisements on a building within a historic district where it had no approvals.

[ Reply ]

Score: 7 ( 15 votes )

M-Rodgers

August 7, 2012 12:38 PM

Interesting that you would use this photo of the rear of 120 Johnson Park as the fines in court were used in a creative and proactive manner.

A few years back the West Villagers fought for four years (http://archives.buffalorising.com/story/a_four_year_anniversary_celebr) to get this property remediated.

That's when Mike Morga was finally able to purchase it at a reasonable cost, but invested major bucks and turned it around to the amazing property it is now.

The Housing Court fines imposed on the previous financial institution were used as leverage to get them to release the property at its actual value rather than what was owed on the loan or market rate.

The use of these fines as leverage allowed positive change for that corner.

Just think what can be done for improvements to neighborhoods if fines were to be collected and reverted to community imporvements rather than to the State or in the General Fund.

[ Reply ]

Score: 6 ( 8 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 1:37 PM

Scaring property owners will only cause those that play by the rules to dump marginal properties, rather than run the risk of being fined.

Those that don't care about being fined won't care about a collection agency hounding them. The answer to too much government isn't let's add more. Make it more profitable to own property, and the housing stock will improve.

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 6 votes )

Rand503

August 7, 2012 5:24 PM

I don't follow you. Are you really suggesting that we allow property owners to ignore the law? Or is your argument that we shouldn't have laws mandating the maintainence of property? And what exactly would be wrong for property owners to "dump" property that they are not properly maintaining?

In fact, wouldn't that be the best of all outcomes? Let the scoflaws dump their property and then someone else will buy it at a low price and then make the necessary repairs? And isn't that how the free market actually works?

Lastly -- how exactly do you make it more profitable to own property, and how does THAT mean the housing stock will improve?

Sounds like you have a lot of sound bites but little substance.

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 5 ( 5 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 8:20 PM

I have completed significant rehab projects in Buffalo (one was a boarded up 1852 building into a fully occupied property). I'm not an absentee landlord, and I keep the place in good condition.

That does not mean I don't have significant problems with City Hall. One example, years ago checking for gas leaks, we created a system where we has a clear hose filled with water etc. to test the system. My neighbor called the city, and said we were attempting to steal gas. That brought in an inspector. They went to the detail of measuring the distance between every electrical outlet in every unit...

When you say 'violates the law', it's actually illegal to have an unoccupied property in the city. Would you start charging every landlord that has a vacant property with a crime? The inspection process is hit or miss, with selective enforcement at best.

[ Reply ]

replied to Rand503

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

whatever

August 7, 2012 8:41 PM

ben>"When you say 'violates the law', it's actually illegal to have an unoccupied property in the city. Would you start charging every landlord that has a vacant property with a crime? The inspection process is hit or miss, with selective enforcement at best."

These replies will get out of order with interleaving...
but anyhow, the above makes sense and of course every law can't be enforced to the letter every time - just like criminal laws, traffic laws, etc. can't either - not even close.

I still just don't get what your first comment meant in the context of the article. Criminal arrests and prosecutions for street crime are also "hit or miss, with selective enforcement at best", as is traffic enforcement.
That doesn't mean it isn't in general usually better than doing nothing at all or that payment of fines should be essentially optional.

(and to your point in what I quoted, yes this city's inspection process should be improved of course, along with many many other things the city does, although realistically it seems that probably won't be any time soon… )

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 9:25 PM

I recently rented a cottage in Maine for the week. It was a nicely rehabbed old home. I started walking around it though...and realized it would have never passed a city of buffalo inspection.

I should realize before wasting my time posting here that most readers lean so far to the left, that any consideration that government may be overreaching is going to be met with the type of responses my earlier post received. The collecting of these fines is just another tax, if you see it as something different, no amount of typing on my part will explain my case.

[ Reply ]

replied to whatever

Score: 0 ( 4 votes )

Captain Picard

August 8, 2012 12:44 AM

I hear ya, Ben.

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

whatever

August 8, 2012 2:08 AM

ben>"The collecting of these fines is just another tax"

Looking at it that way, it already is a "tax" on people who do pay them and it already chases away people who won't buy properties in the city because they don't want to run up huge amounts of unpaid/unreasonable fines they realize they might be assessed if they invest here.

A part of reforming the whole mess should include making more serious effort to collect unpaid reasonable fines, along with greatly reducing the amount of unreasonable fines that are assessed in the first place.

Although no doubt a lot of unpaid fines from past years will have to be disregarded, I still don't see how it makes any sense to continue the current approach indefinitely - pretty much never any effort at all to collect. Even though there's a lot of arbitrariness as you described, also some violations are for objectively serious things dangerous to tenants or even the public. It seems crazy if they really never try to enforce any fine collection at all even for extreme violations.

Yes, much else about the city's inspections system is crazy too, so maybe not much about collecting unpaid fines can be fixed in a vacuum without some other changes. It's apparent that serious reforms in inspections isn't something which Brown or Casey feels like making happen. Common Council members should be loudly pushing for it, yet year after year they show no interest. It might be over their heads, the group who took almost a year to decide how many feet away from a restaurant a food truck should be allowed to park.

Here's the Heaney report which BR should add a link to in the article, since the author references it...
http://www.investigativepost.org/2012/07/18/city-forgoes-millions-housing-fines

In addition to a lot of details, it mentions FWIW that the new judge Carney says he doesn't believe it's a good idea to issue big fines for the purpose of getting property owners' attention:
"… Carney, who took over Housing Court in January 2011 after Nowak was elected to the state Supreme Court, isn’t a fan of using big fines as leverage. He instead prefers to issue bench warrants in an effort to force defendants to show up for court. Last year he issued 348 warrants, compared with an annual average of 217 issued by Nowak from 2006 to 2010.
“I find the arrest warrant is a lot more effective than the fine,” Carney said.
Problem is, the judge said he doesn’t know how many of the 348 warrants he issued were served on defendants, or how many showed for court. No such records are kept that he’s aware of. …"

That last sentence quoted looks like yet another sign of disfunction. They've been issuing hundreds of arrest warrants every year, yet "no such records are kept" to track how many are served, how many show up, etc.

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

whatever

August 7, 2012 8:19 PM

ben - while unintended consequences of any policy should be considered, I don't see how simply making effort to collect fines that are being ignored is an instance of "more government".

It's part of the job of property inspectors and the housing court judge to use sensible discretion when deciding what should be charged, convicted, and how much fines should be in each situation. Judge Nowak had a very good reputation for fairness, and hopefully the one who replaced him will continue that.

But once a fine is issued, then for the city to always ignore nonpayment as though the fine was never issued (which seems to be what often happens) is really crazy for several pretty obvious reasons.

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 4 ( 4 votes )

grad94

August 7, 2012 6:01 PM

here's one thing that stops the city in its tracks: elderly owners. given our graying population, there are lots of them. the freudenheim guy who owned the jersey street livery probably got a pass due to age and/or infirmity.

no one wants to throw the book at grandma or grandpa.

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

whatever

August 7, 2012 8:24 PM

Why shouldn't unpaid property fines just be added to property tax bills? There's already mechanisms and consequences in place for dealing with nonpayment of those.

No one approach will be totally perfect, but that seems like an easy starting point (if they don't do that already).

On another note, this whole thing is another big incompetence not only of the mayor of course but each and every Common Council member. Jim Heaney just reported the collections aren't happening as BR credits him and that's great, but according to this it was a repeat of the same problem the Buffalo News also reported almost 2 years ago back in 2010.
http://www.buffalonews.com/city/columns/off-main-street/article958198.ece
Here's the 2010 report
http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article225268.ece

How come none of our full time year-round Common Council members since 2010 followed up to see if the problem was corrected then make a public issue of it since it hasn't?
Why can Jim Heaney do it but none of them can or will?
So if Heaney had stayed fully retired and hadn't dug into this again now, it would have just silently continued?

[ Reply ]

Score: 3 ( 3 votes )

Crisa

August 7, 2012 9:03 PM

Check out buffalonews.c-- today. Community >> Tonawanda, Tonawanda Board declares vacant home unsafe. The city fell; the burbs are falling-----under the spell of landlordship.

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 2 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 9:15 PM

What led you to believe the property was not owner occupied?

[ Reply ]

replied to Crisa

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

biniszkiewicz

August 7, 2012 9:49 PM

RE: unpaid fines.

I'm curious in Marilyn Rodger's example of the lead photo property (120 S Johnson Park) exactly what the 'leverage' of the fines consisted of, regarding the court encouraging the owner to sell. Were the fines forgiven to a new responsible owner if the current owner willingly parted with the property and the property's offenses were corrected by that new owner? It sounded to me from her recap, and maybe I'm wrong, that something like this was the case.

And if indeed that were the case, how does that get recorded? I'm just curious if it's not possible that not all these fines are valid. I can tell you that the judge has enormous discretion and has the authority to impose a fine of the maximum amount every single day that something doesn't comply. It is unlikely, but possible to fine someone tens of thousands for violations left unfixed for, say, two months. And the courts threaten that they have this power, but if you work with us, we'll work with you, yada yada . . .

In this case it sounds like the court threatened very heavy fines unless the owner sold the property to someone with the wherewithal to fix it. Would something like that have been considered a fine? How does it get accounted for if a future owner is forgiven that fine?

I'm scratching my head wondering if there isn't at least some miscommunication somewhere, at least for some of this seemingly missing money. This is conjecture on my part, and I could be all wet, so anyone with better knowledge: please clear my fog.

[ Reply ]

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 10:09 PM

I can't address your question, but would like to emphasize your point about "work with us, we'll work with you".

For those that don't do the City Inspector dance, it goes something like this. You get a letter, which could be triggered by a number of things (a neighbor may have complained, or you may need your once every three year multiple dwelling inspection...) So, you leave work, and meet the inspector at your property. He begins to tally up what's wrong. He say's the fine for this can accumulate for every day your out of compliance. At this point, you realize he's talking thousands of dollars. I've had inspectors say "wow, this is a really nice place..." before giving me the list (that door closer doesn't close the door fast enough...).

Then they tell you, if you work with us, we'll work with you. Well, that means coming back for multiple follow ups, leaving work, etc. Yes, I correct what needs to be corrected... but not all issues are so clear cut.

Buy a building at the city auction, and find out the current layout doesn't match the drawings that the city has on hand. You're in for thousands of dollars before you even start the project.

If you have experience with the medical profession, you know hospitals overcharge, knowing insurance companies won't pay the full price. These fine totals are akin to that. They are way overblown, but the threat of them gives the inspector some clout. The City isn't collecting them, because they know they are, in most cases, baseless.

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

biniszkiewicz

August 7, 2012 11:06 PM

I'm sure a bunch of fines are assessed to properties that are subsequently demolished, too, or given up for tax auction.

Technically, giving away the property doesn't get an owner out of owing the fines (unless specifically agreed to by the court). But realistically, if the court has imposed, say, $5,000 in fines against a property that the owner simply gives up for back taxes, what owner is going to pay back more than the house itself? Once an owner walks away from a property, it's a pound of flesh to go after more. The upshot of pursuing those punitive fines would be more owners walking away from the business and neighborhoods falling apart faster for a lack of buyers willing to risk investing.

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

M-Rodgers

August 8, 2012 3:53 PM

Originally, and months previous to the settlement, the fines imposed were $18,000.

I a pre-trial conference, there was a recommendation from the community to relieve the fines if the financial institution were to sell the property at its value vs. market rate or what was owed prior to foreclosure. The financial institution opted for that plan.

It's a tool that has been used before in Housing Court to eliminate blight and drug houses in a more timely manner.

Nothing odd or head-scratching there.

[ Reply ]

replied to biniszkiewicz

Score: 1 ( 3 votes )

benfranklin

August 8, 2012 4:03 PM

Housing court's tools... private sector's coercion or extortion.

[ Reply ]

replied to M-Rodgers

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

biniszkiewicz

August 8, 2012 6:35 PM

thanks. my head scratching was in relation to believing that there is really $12m+ sitting out there waiting to be collected. I'm skeptical, that's all.

[ Reply ]

replied to M-Rodgers

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

grad94

August 7, 2012 9:58 PM

a ways up, benfranklin wrote:
When you say 'violates the law', it's actually illegal to have an unoccupied property in the city.

someone claimed that in an argument with me once so i went to the city code in search of the relevant statute. couldn't find one. so, in case i am missed something, which is entirely possible since i am not a lawyer, can you supply the citation & language of this law?

[ Reply ]

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

benfranklin

August 7, 2012 10:13 PM

When I initially purchased an abandoned property, I was told by my first inspector I was in violation of city code because my building was not occupied.

He then went into the 'you work with us, we'll work with you' routine.

Maybe he wasn't being truthful, maybe I'm incorrect, but I've certainly been told this by multiple inspectors.

[ Reply ]

replied to grad94

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

grad94

August 8, 2012 8:03 AM

okay, bro readers, we're turning to you. if those of you who know your way around the city code could give it a few minutes of your time, we'd be grateful.

if it is illegal to rent out space in a building that fails to meet code, then it cannot also be illegal to -not- rent the space. see what i'm saying?

[ Reply ]

replied to benfranklin

Score: 0 ( 0 votes )

M-Rodgers

August 8, 2012 3:58 PM

Not necessarily "city" code but the NYS Property Maintenance Code -

A vacant structure may stand as such if it is (1) on the market for sale or (2) under rehabilitation without too many lapses in time.

[ Reply ]

replied to grad94

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

grad94

August 9, 2012 7:29 AM

thanks, m-rodgers, that explains why i didn't find it in the city code.

seems 100% unenforceable, given that the city is the single largest owner of vacant properties in buffalo.

[ Reply ]

replied to M-Rodgers

Score: 1 ( 1 votes )

M-Rodgers

August 9, 2012 11:26 AM

Agreed, grad94. Unfortunately, the city has a fail-safe in not allowing properties it has jurisdiction over to be cited by Inspections.

As far as those vacants owned by private individuals and LLC's, community groups, block clubs, and associations can fight to get them in court and perform the dance to further fight for turn-over in a realistic sale price vs. the market-rate or balance of loan, if it is, in fact, an abandoned and foreclosed property.

It's a start and on JP we were able to turn two such properties into solid ownership with great rehab. One being the one pictured in this article and the other is the red brick next to the New Phoenix. Both were foreclosures and being used for heroin sales, squatting, etc. Both were reduced sales prices in a range of 38% - 59% of the original ask. Lower sales pricing allowed for more monies to be put into rehab. Makes sense.

[ Reply ]

replied to grad94

Score: 2 ( 2 votes )

City needs to put Housing Court fines out to collection

Categories:

Comments

Leave a comment

Related Stories

Service Learning: 100% Urban Dedication

Extreme Community Viewing Event: ReUse, PUSH, AmericCorps

Buffalo ReUse ReGifting Party

Recent Comments

Buffalo Rising Media