There has been a proposed law, titled the “Nuisance Law”, or as some call it the Slum Lord Control Law, that has been buried or “tabled” by Council member Frank Ferrando for almost 4 years.

I have gone to City Council a number of times and asked that this law be brought back up, at least for a vote up or down, and both past President Ferrando current President Mallow, would not do it.

There has been no reason given me other than being told we have new codes and new people hired to enforce them. Guess the new codes and personnel didn’t do the job after all.

Charlie,
This is a horrible idea. The city is not a homeowners association. You have no right to tell me what my house should look like. Is this committee going to decide that the color of my house reduces its property value and therefore must be changed? How about my selection of flowers? What if the committee doesn't like my taste in grass length?

This is a money and power grab. The city wants higher property values so they can reassess your property value and charge you high taxes based on the new higher value that they forced you to achieve.

My house, though mostly blue, has a different color on the outside of the attic. Are they going to ensure the color scheme of the house is consistent? I will be in need of a new roof on the main part of the house in a couple years but it doesn't match my porch roof, are they going to ensure I change that before I can afford to and before it needs to be done.



"Committee member Anne Baron added, "There are too many people who live in the community who do not have the community's best interest in mind. They treat it as nothing."

The proposed changes will give the city officials greater authority to get into homes"

The community's best interest is not my best interest. America was founded in individual rights, not community rights. I have the right to live in the house of my choosing. You have no right to enter my home and tell me how to live.

"The proposed changes will give the city officials greater authority to get into homes"


"You have no right to enter my home and tell me how to live."

Amen, Peter !!

Although, Mike Smith, Barb Toal, and Ron Panek are welcome at my home anytime...hopefully not on official business...

Calm down guys. We are talking about rental properties. This has nothing to do with the color of your house. This has to do with safety, electrical wires, smoke detectors, heaters and major plumbing problems. Being a landlord is running a business, the city needs to make sure these properties are safe and kept up. These laws are pretty common.

Also, Anne’s words have did not follow her train of thought. No one is going to be walking in your house unless you’re renting it or just sold it. That will be by appointment, with you there for a safety inspection.

Charlie,
Is this the "Nuisance Law" from 4 years ago, or a new one?

John, let me say it again. The “Nuisance Law” was not defendable in court. Why would we pass an ordinance that would be unenforceable?

This started because Councilperson Biakowski drove himself to a NYCOM training session and learned about these matters. He gathered the information and presented it to the NIC. The NIC went through the laws and recommended ones that are enforceable and in use in the state. This is no great change from what other cities are using to control absentee landlords and help with safety issues. There is no “constitutional infringement”.

John, I can answer that -- this is new -- the committee reviewed laws from various other cities around the state to help shape its proposal.

And to say this is a "money and power grab" by the city is a gross over statement. While there are certain merits to the libertarian argument that government has no business telling private property owners what they can do with their property, it's important to know and understand that the Neighborhood Improvement Committee is a CITIZENS committee. It's comprised of volunteers from around the city who are interested in cleaner, safer neighborhoods. If you don't like what the committee is doing, show up at its meetings and offer your input.

Charlie,
Based on the article above it will apply to homeowners as the properties in Batavia are bought and sold.

Is the "law" going to mention specifically what can and cannot be inspected?

A lot of the language used in the quotes is down right scary to me. There are many quotes that give the impression that the government will be taking freedom away.




"Valle agreed and said it's important to help residents understand that they're more than just occupants in a building when they move into Batavia."

"Under the terms of the proposed codes, landlords will need to register their tenants with the city so that city officials know who is living at a particular residence"

"Under the terms of the proposed changes, any landlord who lives outside the area will be required to register an "agent of record" who lives in Genesee County and will assume responsibility for the property."

"I keep telling tenants when they moved in next to me, you didn't move into a house. You moved into a neighborhood. You have to respect the people around you and you have to respect the neighborhood."




This is an issue that is easily solvable through better lease agreements.

Just to play devil's advocate, Peter -- how do you propose we get to better lease agreements?

If the landlords want their tenants to be more proactive in taking care of the property, they can make stipulations in the lease.

If the tenants want more things fixed by the landlord, only sign leases that appeal to them.

Is this going to apply to me as an informal landlord? I rent to a Muckdog but their is no formal lease agreement between him and I.

Peter, what if a landlord doesn't want to hold the tenant accountable?

What if that property is next to yours?

Isn't that landlord depriving you of your right to the quiet enjoyment of your personal property?

Where do you draw the line -- should the landlord, rather than the city, be solely responsible for enforcing not only trash pick up and weed abatement, but whether the tenant can have loud rock and roll parties at 3 a.m.? And whether the tenant can burn toxic materials in the backyard while your kids are playing in your back yard?

I'm all for private property rights, but there also comes a point where in a city environment, with everything closer together, that what one person does can have a profound and grave impact on the property rights of another person. How are those issues best resolved -- just hope that the other person will do the right thing, or allow the government to have some enforcement power of laws designed to protect the common good?

At some point, economic prosperity of both you and me depends on a common set of aspirational behavior. Should we suffer because a minority of people refuse to comply with common sense matters of the common good?

As a libertarian and a localist, my complaint isn't so much with local government -- it's with state and federal government, which often makes it harder for local government to operate effectively. But what we need to do as local people is work with the tools we have available locally to improve as best we can the quality of life locally. If local people want to impose on themselves ordinances aimed at protecting the common good, I think that is as the Founders envisioned. What they didn't imagine were these big non-local governments.

This proposal is not about burning toxic waste. Its about upkeep and property value. If the landlord doesn't hold his tenant accountable, that is his business. As you know, a sound ordinance to stop rock music in the middle of the night is not the same as having someone come inspect my home. Sure there is are places of conflict between rights of property in a city, but that doesn't mean we need this kind of intrusion by the government.

As far as for people buying a home, if they aren't bright enough to get a home inspector as part of the buying process, they deserve the heart ache of major plumbing problems and heating problems. Some people find out about these issues and still want to buy the home. Will the government still force the seller to fix it before it can be sold?

I understand your view of local ordinances and if the people want it, they should get it. I don't want this.

Peter, like I said, -- where do you draw the line? At one point does the lack of caring by a landlord interfere with your right to enjoy your property and ensure it retains your value? If the landlord doesn't give a rip about the value of his land, then neither do I. But if his careless disregard for his land begins to impact the value of my home, then I damn sure well want something done about it.

There are any number of things a landlord or tenant can do or not do that impact the value of the surrounding properties that fall far short of the extreme examples I used. The point was, where do you draw the line?

You're way too focused on "inspecting my home" as opposed to what this proposal is really about.

And I'm not even necessarily sold on this specific proposal. But in concept I understand the need in a city environment to ensure some common standards are in place and at some level or to some degree enforced.

Why do we have two code enforcement personal if they can't do anything about code violators.What do these people do all day..Look at the Jubilee and Della Penna buildings across the street from each other.Talk about needing up keep..Will we need to hire more code personal to enforce these new proposed codes..If they aren't enforcing the old laws how are they going to enforce new ones....

They will use the cops this time. If they are willing to send you to jail over an unmowed lawn then a "safety infraction" is going to get even stiffer penalties.

What about living next to a rental home owned by someone in Rochester who has not visited the property in person over the duration of the six years we've lived next to it? The shingles from the roof were crumbling and landed in our yard by the box-load. We donated the box of shingles and shreds of shingles to their garage in case they wanted to tack them back up. I think they may have gotten the hint - they finally had a new roof installed. Or that the landlord's 'manager' assures the tenants that the lawn will be mowed and it never is. The neighbors end up taking turns mowing because no one on the street wants to live near the mess? This is not the fault of the tenant, but that of the landlord.

It isn't about dictating about decor or personal taste; it is about general maintenance that interferes with the neighbors and causes more work for them. Not a privacy issue at all.

Mark - that's a good point. Are they going to have to hire extra people to do all of these inspections, keep track of all of the names of the tenants, landlord agents, etc. and making sure that the landlords comply with these requirements? Also, is there a fee for the Residential and Rental Occupancy Permit? Permits usually require a fee.

Charlie,
Four years ago, as you know, the Nuisance law was tabled by City Council and sent to the City Attorney to have it made “enforceable”. This after a closed meeting Councilman Frank Ferrando attended with a number of landlords. Even the Daily News was not allowed in the meeting, and you spoke out against that at the time. That law has been sitting around all this time.

Was it so bad that the Attorney could not fix it? Why did he not report back that the proposed law was so bad and why let it sit for four years? I know you were not in the majority much of that time, but what happened?

So will the city be able to dictate who should get a new roof on their house..Are they going to dictate whose house needs painting..Is this just for rental property.Is private property excluded..

Peter, you’re over reacting to a very, very common laws and practices. I also understand that half of this is your shtick and you like to debate.

I don’t want people living next to me who don’t take care of their property. I don’t think people should be living in homes without smoke detectors, exposed wiring and toilets that don’t flush. I am not going to debate the merits of safe homes and clean neighborhoods. I live in a city with homes on top of each other. These things are a necessity.

I think people can manage those specific difficulties without the governments involvement.

Will host families for the Muckdogs be considered landlords for this law? How will the city know who to prosecute for not registering their tenants?

John, I understand your point of view and we have talked about this over and over again. I do not care what the law is called; I want safe clean neighborhoods in the city. We do not and should not be reinventing the wheel like was attempted with the “Nuisance law”. I would rather use common enforceable laws that most cities use.

Mark, the city does all those things you’re talking about now, always has.

Peter, is your house a rundown shack with broken toilets and exposed electrical wiring? Are you making a Muckdog player live in filth? I did not think so... kind of silly..

Beth, the NIC is recommending that the Batavia FD do the inspections.

If the Fire Dept. goes volunteer, as Council directed the manager to study, what does the NIC recommend take their place?

I have some exposed wiring in the attic and my closet. My trunk cable from the meter to the electrical panel in the basement needs to be replaced and I have some double taps on breakers that have over a 60% fail rate.

I plan on taking care of this on my own but its not my highest priority because I work with deadly levels of electricity daily. I understand what I can and can't do safely with it.

Charlie if the city does all these things now then why do i see alot of bad roofs and houses that need paint jobs all over the city..Jubilee building is a eye sore,why aren't they dealing with that..Point being doesn't seem like the city is enforcing the rules they have on the books now...And now you want to add more codes to enforce..Will the city need to hire more code officers to enact this..

If the Fire Dept has to do the inspections does that mean you will have to amend their contract..Is that part of their job..

Charlie - is the fire department really qualified to do such inspections? As far as smoke detectors - yes. But as to plumbing and electrical inspections, I don't see how they are qualified to do that.

I guess the real question is what exactly will the inspections consist of? The article states "The proposed changes will give the city officials greater authority to get into homes and inspect them for safety issues as well as compliance with a range of city building and occupancy codes." Which safety issues and city building and occupancy codes? How do we plan to train these firemen to properly inspect? Will this mean more overtime than they are already getting because we all know that that has been a big issue.

Will there be a fee for a Residential and Rental Occupancy Permit? A large complex like Walden Estates which takes very good care of their property would have significant fees if they have to file one of these for each tenant. And how will they recoup these fees? By raising rent of course or somehow passing it on to the tenants.

Peter, I would get the wiring fixed, you’re making me worry about your safety.

Mark so, your saying there are problem houses in the city and it doesn’t seem like the city can keep up with them? Huh..

As for the fire department union contract, maybe they would want to take some preventive steps and would look forward to doing the work? This idea sounds like job security to me. Fire departments do this type of thing all over the country.

Sorry Charlie but it sounds like overtime to me!

Charlie,
I have my hands in 70KW DC power supplies on a regular basis and 20KW RF power supplies. Not to mention the test fixtures I have to troubleshoot as well. Electricity needs to be respected by just because its exposed doesn't mean someone is going to get shocked.

Beth, the permit is every 36 months. Tenant registration is for the benefit of the landlord and the NIC has not recommended a fee for that. A registered tenant would get a notice for some violations, like garbage.

Charlie thats the point we don't need new rules or laws ..Enforce the ones on the books now...Why do we have code enforcement personal all these years if they can't enforce ?????

Sorry Charlie, it sounds like an invasion of privacy to me. If your going to have tenant registration, then you better have homeowner registration too. Maybe a 3 strikes your out policy.

Charlie,
Would this new law apply to apartments in the Town of Batavia if we consolidate, or would the new law be the City only?

This story really hits home doesn't it?I remember in 1992 living on Ellsworth.It was my first real apartment.It had one space heater in the living room.It was so cold that i had to put a fan on the ceiling to be warm.I was not on HUD then.And i do not think i was a good neighbor either.I used to play my music loud all day and night.I asked to have heat installed.My landlord then was angry.He came over intoxicated and was mean.Since i was not on HUD i could withhold rent by law.And keep it in escarole until the problem was fixed.My landlord came over and apologized to me for being mean.He meant it.And heat was installed.That was great man.

Now that i am older, i try harder to be a good tenant.When we lived on State street we tried to keep the garbage picked up.Keep the garbage put out every week.Keep the apartment clean.Not have parties like i used to.I figure if we live there we should.But then one day we were told after 6 years we had to pay heat.Our electric bill was $150 all year.So then all year our electric bill plus gas would be 450$ or 500$ all year.Because we had electric hot water dryer and stove.It would have been 200$ for electricity without energy saving bulbs.I complained to HUD and my landlord about it.There was nothing i could do it was legal.But the heat was not separated.I found out that we were to be paying heat for the whole house.Plus i had failed a HUD inspection.A city worker came and wrote a report about an improper drain and that heat was not separated.
Then we got our termination of our non existent lease.I was given a chance to sign an unconscionable lease.I did not.See a landlord cant evict you for asking to have something fixed.So they say they're terminating the lease.We were forced to move because of HUD rules.Under real property law if we were not on HUD that would not happen.So 54,000$ of ours and HUD money gone.I wonder if the problem was fixed?I know our neighbor said she didn't want us to leave.Shes 80 years old.She saw my boys grow.They played in her yard.We were nearly homeless then.

So we moved to Highland.We lived here a whole year.Our landlord told me we are good tenants.We spent a lot of hours cleaning up the property here.And the basement was wet and moldy we fixed that somewhat.Then comes our HUD inspection.I was told i put holes in a doors i did not.I complained.I asked why my rent went up?I was told because of the alleged, third bedroom.I asked for something in writing why my amount went up so much.I never got anything.I got terminated on HUD.I still have not received a hearing notice.They are on a conference this week.I paid money i do not owe.

Are most of the properties HUD properties in question?What are tenants responsible for?Why are there different rules for HUD tenants?We get a month by month lease after a year.Unlike other tenants.Some HUD landlords probably can't afford to do work.The little guy.Some i think just collect the cash.Why do work?But if a HUD tenant misses one payment bye.Or if you dare complain see ya.I was just thinking why care when we get treated like that?We are most likely blacklisted now.I'm wondering now that we are terminated when does our termination of our monthly lease come?

Why would a person who owns so many properties want to make tenant laws?Isn't that a conflict?What about good tenants?Who do what they're supposed to?If landlords only care about cash how do tenants feel?Cause were on HUD we can be thrown out like the trash right?And HUD will fill the apartment right away.It will take years to clean up all the code violations that have been overlooked if ever.And we tenants should be held responsible right?

Dan, you type fast!! You should look for a clarical job.

John, you seem to have a hard time grasping this idea of tiers. People live on rural property for a reason. Who would expect a rural resident to abide by an ordinance made for an urban resident? Also, if we were wise enough to consolidate, people in the old City tier are not going to pay for inspection work done in the town.

Why is it always about money all the time?? Charlie with all due respect, your ideas are borderline discrimination. East side, south side, city, town, it doesnt matter, as we are all equals.

Charlie I don't mean to be adversarial. I am just very protective of my wallet right now and if this is going to cost the taxpayers one extra dime, whether it be in permit fees, overtime or training for the fire department, etc., I am opposed to it. I also worry that someone who is not qualified to make these inspections is going to make decisions that could adversely affect us.

I think the general dislike of this plan from all sides by people who are usually rivals in discussion should show that the people don't want this.

I hope all the people who say they don't like this idea, or have serious questions about it, show up at the public hearing when that meeting comes up.

And keep in mind, the proposed laws/changes aren't even written yet. I see lots of assumptions (such as telling people what color to paint their houses) that aren't supported by the facts available at this time.

What happens when you upgrade your property..They raise your assessment..Costing you more...I know of some not all people would rather keep there assessment down, then to fix up the outside of their property..You hear is all the time..
That it will make my assessment go up...

All properties, rentals, and privately owned homes as well. Renters should not be singled out. New rules should include, Christmas decorations, and stagnant pools, garbage strune about, recyclables being put out to soon, so the wind doesnt send them all over the neighborhood, ect. Mark is right though, the city already has rules in place, they just dont enforce them. I've also noticed these only apply to certain people. It shouldn't make a difference, homeowner, or renter, rich, or poor.

Peter, tell the Muckdog to stay out of the attic and your closet. Then warn him that if the temptation becomes too great make sure that he doesn't lick his fingers and grab onto the exposed wiring. It's called CYA.

You know, a civil, free society falls apart to the proportion in which people put selfish interests over community interests.

Charlie,
There are apartment complexes in the Town, some on Main Street, near McDonald’s. It is an easy question, would they come under this? They are only a few hundred feet from the present City boarder line.

Being that close, why should they be exempt?

So, will the Town properties, almost on the city line, come under this?

After waiting four years, I am in favor of the plan (pending reading the fine print).