The success in Success Village seems so anachronistic considering the institutional failure impacting roughly 2,000 residents in the East Side housing co-op birthed some 70 years ago. Try as they may city officials and neighborhood leaders are scrambling for some public closure to private entity whose residents suffer without hot water.
And that’s the rub: private. Would be a difficult but more manageable task if residents were renters. They own their property. It’s not like they can just walk away from their investment. Under these circumstances who wants to buy?
They are at the mercy of a board that has been unable to navigate a modern infrastructure heating system. It’s been patches on top of patches and you know how that turns out. In addition owners pay $500 each month in common charges? Where does that money go? The co-op is millions behind on tax payments. Where has that pool of money gone?
Bridgeport isn’t alone in this. The co-op is split between the city and Stratford.
Sometimes things don’t move along unless dramatic action bangs the drum.
There’s been some discussion about the Park City Communities, the management arm of the public housing authority, to take over. That means bringing in the feds into a private entity. Fat chance. The best to hope for in that situation is a short-term management agreement with Park City Communities to provide some structure but with no resources behind it.
What if Mayor Joe Ganim and Stratford Mayor Laura Hoydick urged emergency action in state court to place the units into receivership triggering a custodial responsibility that transcends or eliminates the board to protect the residents from mismanagement. If nothing is done now to sound the alarm bell what happens in five months when cold weather moves in?
Also isn’t it time for a review of the co-op’s books so property owners know where their money is going?
Success Village needs a benevolent dictator.
This post says “where does the money go” as if to imply (intentionally or not) that there may be foul play, or at least insertion of these words can lead readers to make that connection. The reality is that $500 is very low for a Coop of this size and this age. Also residents have the ability to vote for the Board. So while the accountability rests with the Board, the residents are also accountable as homeowners for who they put in place. Another point is that common charges usually are aimed at operating costs and establishing some reserves over time but $500 common charges are not designed for capital projects of this magnitude. Usually an assessment is done outside of the common charges. What I would like to know is the extent of the problem and the projected cost to address it. While the city administration might not get involved it all comes down to a matter of choice and political will. Sure the argument can be made that this is private but the city has historically gotten involved (and not gotten involved) when and where it suits their purpose. However this is a serious issue that can risk a voting block and significant depreciation of property values, and inability to find occupants if homeowners walk away or decease.
Privately owned garden type apartment units? (Similar in nature to Garden Apartments in Black Rock or Seaside Village in South End.) Yes. Where do residents of such residential real estate look to municipal governance today? Is there such a body for “governance or financial matters”? Is there any reporting function by governing bodies of such real property to any administrative department of City government?
With self governance located in legal documents, including likely ByLaws, that have been adopted at some time in the past; identifying rights and responsibilities of all parties as residents, neighbors, citizens, property owners; calling for regular meetings with minutes, agendas, and opportunity for reporting, listening, and questioning; and especially accountability for duties of leaders, and likely oversight in the form of regular reports of financial status for the entity itself (showing any official liabilities of a long term nature including City property liability or WPCA fees) would the public be better situated at moments like this when “hot water” seems an instant problem, but larger issues likely lurk in the background?
Can any member of the Bridgeport City Council identify a City group, board, or commission that might be an “early warning system” for the plight of Success residents in this instance? A series of Mayors has ignored their duty to place a Fair Housing Commission in action for 20 years. Why is that? And voters have not held Mayors accountable for this lapse. Why no consequences, while keeping Fair Rent and Fair Housing on City website for decades, as if they were real and alive?
Where is public oversight for neighbors in trouble? Is it with the State of CT? Who is delinquent in response and responsibility at this moment? Who can enter the scene, grasp the reins, consider the who, what, when and why promptly so that the “quality of life and living” for community neighbors does not have to spiral down any further before temperatures drop in the fall and heating concerns become difficult to remedy in an efficient manner? Who is stalling in reporting the facts? Who will respond to this massive residential housing issue? Time will tell.
Rough estimate, revamp electric service, add hot water heaters, AC/ heat pump units. 20k per unit x 900.
How would the Taxpayers underwrite this project?
Lennie,
A closet autocrat calling for a “benevolent dictator”. Tell me it isn’t so.
Real estate is a subject known to the Mayor, practical profit and legal operations, but does the Mayor care? If it cannot be solved with a photo op and forgotten, is he interested? If rules of self-governance have gone unobserved or likely broken, is it beyond time to address such a subject? At a time of housing shortage, why allow unresponsive self-governance to founder for smaller residential owners? Where does a rule of law and municipal ordinances come into play?
Please, no more “dictator” talk!! How about folks emphasizing the role of democratic actions and systems to address more completely the human failures of our governance structures? Time will tell.
“…Success Village needs a benevolent dictator….”
Lenny; surely you jest! — closing your serious commentary with such an incongruous oxymoron…
In any event, the whole issue of financial abuse/extortion of unsophisticated, modest-income condo owners by property-investor-dominated boards working with unscrupulous, “paid-off,” politically-connected board-member co-conspirators, is a topic worthy of the highest-level investigative reporting by the most prominent/reliable media sources…
Think “Nob Hill Condominiums” (et al.) as well as “Success Village” when thinking of abuse and theft of property from unsophisticated condo-owners forced to sell their units to property-investors (sitting on the board/connected to the board) when soaring, unjustifiable common charges present as insurmountable liabilities/liens on their property… [Not to mention lack of maintenance of common-area properties (basement storage areas, etc.) that would be cited by health departments, if inspected by honest agents…]
Lots of abuse/extortion of modest-income property owners in Bridgeport — by government as well as predatory property investors working in concert with the latter… Good topic for the Connecticut Post or any number of high-level, reliable/trustworthy journalistic agencies… [And maybe even the Connecticut Attorney General’s Office? But, with NED as governor…(?)…]
“…Lots of abuse/extortion of modest-income property owners in Bridgeport — by government as well as predatory property investors working in concert with the latter…” Should have said “with the former” or simply “working in concert.” (Lenny — we (posters) need an after-the-fact edit option…)