FARMINGTON – Selectmen signified their intent to initiate legal proceedings in regards to two pieces of property at Tuesday evening’s meeting, marking the potential conclusion of months of meetings, plans and reports.
Selectmen moved unanimously to seek a legal ruling to begin removing debris from a house at 185 Maple Ave (shown above), owned by Jonathan and Benjamin Cummings. On Dec. 8, 2008, a quick-moving fire gutted the house, although firefighters were able to save an attached barn and apartment, which the brothers have been living in.
However, repairs have not proceeded since the incident, creating a potentially dangerous situation. Tuesday, Code Enforcement Officer Steve Kaiser noted in a report that while “the Cummings have been actively knocking down the main house portion,” debris had not been removed from the site.
“They’ve made a stab at it,” Kaiser told the board, “but disposal is the problem.”
Selectmen hope that the ruling, which would require an affirmative vote at a special town meeting, would allow the town to hire someone to finish the demolition, remove the debris and fill in the cellar hole. The money for this would come out of the town’s undesignated fund account.
Then, after the work had been completed, a special tax would be levied against the property to repay the town for the work.
Jonathan Cummings was at the meeting.
“I need help cleaning it up,” he said, “plain and simple. I’d love to see it cleaned up as soon as possible.”
Selectmen also signified a willingness to take a similar step in regards to the residence located at 103 Bridge Street in West Farmington, owned by Joel Batzell.
Problems began in October 2008, when a woman complained that she was injured at Batzell’s residence, after falling down a ladder which provides access to part of the building. The house is a well-known landmark in Farmington, located directly next to the West Farmington end of Center Bridge.
An investigation by the state Fire Marshal’s Office found several safety violations that included an insufficient chimney for the oil furnace, exposed electrical wiring and the over-use of extension cords throughout the structure, unsafe stairs, narrow hallways, lack of the correct construction material barrier between the living and storage areas that can delay a fire from spreading and escape egresses, according to the report.
Selectmen met with Batzell at their Nov. 25, 2008 meeting, entering into a consent agreement that gave him 60 days to submit a work plan and fix the list of violations. On Jan. 27, selectmen granted Batzell, who did not attend the meeting, a 30-day extension. Then, on March 10, selectmen met again with Batzell and were informed that progress was being made.
Code Enforcement Officer Steve Kaiser reported then that Batzell was developing a work plan and was working with Western Maine Community Action and the USDA’s rural development renovation program to secure funding. Batzell, who attended the meeting, said he was interested in fixing up the property.
“As you come over the bridge, it really looks like crap,” Batzell told selectmen on March 10. “I’m trying to fix it up.”
However, Batzell was also required, by the state, to develop a plan of action to make all of the repairs and to provide certification by a licensed electrician and a structural engineer that the wiring and building met the state’s fire code standards.
Tuesday, Kaiser reported that the electrical portion of the plan had been mostly completed, with Batzell only needing to replace battery-operated fire alarms with a hardwired system. The carpentry parts of the plan however, including fixing stairs, providing primary and secondary means of escape and making hallways confirm to regulations, as well as developing a structural assessment, have not been completed.
“We’re a bit shy of a year here,” Selectman Jon Bubier noted. “I’m not impressed with the progress here.” He added that a new heating season would be starting soon, adding additional potential costs and delays.
“I think a year is too long,” Selectman Ryan Morgan agreed.
Should the plan be approved at a special town meeting, and a legal ruling be made, the process would be similar to the one being set in motion for the Maple Street property. The town would pay for contractors to make the necessary modifications to the Bridge Street residence to bring it up to code, and then levy a special tax on the property.
However selectmen declined to pass a motion that evening, as the Batzell property was not on the agenda like the Maple Street property was. Instead, selectmen asked that it be added to next meeting’s agenda, to give Batzell a chance to be present to ask questions.
In other business, selectmen approved the expenditure of $2,500 to repair a defective cement floor in the fire engine garage. The cement near the sliding doors which allow vehicular access forms a large bump. The money will allow for replacement hot top to be put down after the bump is removed, and a drain will be installed. The funds will come out of the special projects account, which currently has $2,974 in it.
Cleaning up a pile of debre from a fire is basic work that the towns equipment could complette a lot of, but fixing up a rental building to bring it up to code so the owner can get an income from it is wrong. The town is not a GC or a bank, If Batzell can’t bring it up to code for rental then close it down. He can still live there himself, just no tenants.
At the previous selectmen’s meeting I thought it was pretty well agreed that Joel is doing as well as he can, and the inability to make major changes to his building was not his fault. Why this obsession with harassing him? Whose interests is it really serving? Who was it who dragged the fire marshal into this in the first place?
In any case it is not a rental property as we ordinarily understand that term. Joel has for many years been providing a place for homeless people who have nowhere else to go. The town isn’t providing for them. They contribute money or work as they are able (some are not able). Joel isn’t getting rich off them–he’s lucky if they don’t steal from him. Nobody’s interests would be served by kicking these people out into the street. The simple fact is that it is difficult and expensive to make major upgrades to a large and very old building; this can’t be done in a short time. And everyone involved knows that. But we keep hearing these threats of taking Joel to court, as if it were his fault, and as if a court could magically renovate a building when nobody else can. What is the real agenda? and why?
Joel has in fact done a lot of work on his house; it is in better condition, in several ways, than it was a year ago. But how he survives the harassment I don’t know. Please, can we have some concerted action by responsible members of the community to stop this senseless harassment of a good man?
As for the Cummings house, why not publish a notice asking for volunteers to remove the debris? That would be a lot cheaper, a lot friendlier, and a lot quicker than going to court and imposing extra taxes. Are we a community or not?
I think you will find, that the Fire Marshals Office dosn’t have Joel’s name on a list for harassment, It’s not about Joel, It’s about safty and saving a life. If Joel wants to help homeless people thats great, But it dosn’t excuse him for the need to provide a safe place for them to sleep. You say it’s not his fault, But when he lets folks stay in the building he has a responability to make sure they are safe and without proper exits and stairways, if the building were on fire everyone sleeping inside could die. So i ask who would be at fault then? Could you live with the fact that you were aware of pour egress, but still let people sleep in the building and they died because they couldn’t find there way out through the smoke. It happens! And thats way there are codes to keep people safe. If you want to be a care provider you have a responsability to make sure the place is safe.