Cracks In City’s Sidewalk Repair Program – Who’s Responsible For Fixes? Legal Opinion Sought

During Joe Ganim’s first tenure as mayor, November 1991-April 2003, sidewalk enhancement was a hallmark of his administration led by Public Facilities Director John Marsilio.

Ganim summoned nostalgia in his 2015 return to office. But his second time around was implemented with a caveat. The city will repair the sidewalk but the property owner is billed for half the cost. If the property owner doesn’t cough it up, a lien is placed. To many, seems like unjust punishment.

The city opines the law is clear, property owners must clean sidewalks from ice and snow. Sidewalk repair maintenance, however, is ambiguous, so claims the city, and has asked Attorney General William Tong to provide legal guidance.

CT Post reporter Brian Lockhart shares more in this issue:

Eight years ago, Mayor Joe Ganim’s administration created a sidewalk repair program on the premise that, unlike with public roads, abutting private property owners, not government, are responsible for keeping those pedestrian pathways in tip-top shape.

“The city has the legal right to force sidewalk repairs and recoup from the homeowner 100% of the costs for the repair,” declares Bridgeport’s website. “The program will invite and encourage homeowners to identify their sidewalks in need of repair and … if accepted, the city will absorb 50% of the cost.”

But officials here may have been wrong all along about that aforementioned legal right.

Attorney Tyesha Toms, whom Ganim hired early this year to run the law department, this week said she will be seeking an advisory opinion on that 50/50 sidewalk repair program from Connecticut Attorney General William Tong’s office.

Full story here

1+
Share

9 comments

  1. Sidewalks are for public safety. Clearly, public safety infrastructure is the province of the municipality and he state — especially if requirements for such infrastructure isn’t acquired through a direct, democratic process. Forcing people to install public infrastructure on their property at their own expense is just anathema to a free society.

    The cost should be born by the city for city roads, and by the state for state roads — with the feds stepping up to help under federal transportation and safety programs. No private citizen should be able to be held hostage for public safety improvements by the government…

    Sidewalks mustn’t be allowed to become another stealthy means to exploit the citizen-taxpayer/property onward in the manner of the “Theft Act” that we recognize as the law that created the WPCA and it exploitative taxes and license to steal property!

    4+
    1. Jeff?

      “The Program will invite and encourage homeowners to identify their sidewalks in need of repair and to participate. If accepted, the city will absorb 50% of the cost (more in certain instances where residents receive Tax Relief credits). This Pilot Program will expire upon the expenditure of $3 million City dollars in Program sidewalk repairs.”

      Jeff this doesn’t sound like it is forcing any home 🏡 owner to fix their sidewalks.

      Not sure what this statement means or why it is warranted.

      “City can be held liable under certain circumstances for injuries resulting therefrom. As such, the City has the legal right to force sidewalk repairs and recoup from the homeowner 100% of the costs for the repair.”

      I would like to know under what certain circumstances the city is liable.

      For the most part, it seems the program was a scheme to expend 3 million of Taxpayers’ money. I am sure contractors were involved in the program, though with some benefits. I guess you can say.

      But at the end of the day, it may seem those “participants” didn’t pay up their fair share that the city paid upfront. I would have to bet the total price was inflated too.

      Since, it was the city that set up the program, taxpayer funding and they perhaps handed picked the contractors for the repairs for those who “participated”, in the program. There are two scenarios

      One, the “participants” did pay back the city for the costs the city paid upfront which can apply to your assessment

      “What you stated. A stealthy means to exploit the citizen-taxpayer/property onward in the manner of the “Theft Act” that we recognize as the law that created the WPCA and its exploitative taxes and licenses to steal property!”

      I am sure there are some Hell bound vultures circling around that scenario.

      However, my bet in this political climate is the same that stops WPCA from foreclosing and taking people home instead of just turning off the utility like the rest of the utilities. which I believe is happening now.

      They want to buzz around towards that room, so be.

      At any rate, depending on the amount the city has invested in taxpayers’ funds on the program if it stayed within the original 3 million, it may be just political spending as usual and those who got a new sidewalk as this plays itself out. Right, Moses. 🙂

      If it’s over 3 million the city, G2, and the CC have some explaining to do but taking people’s homes is not good for elected officials/politics. Very different for a monopoly company. Taking someone home by means of a utility bill is some cool shit. But that’s how the laws work, the ones you create. JS

      What say you Moses who’s playing/robbing who? Is it the taxpayers, homeowners, or the vultures? My bat taxpayers all get taken when it comes to government spending. 🙂

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qKLgNjXE4U

      2+
  2. Are you saying the city should be responsible for snow removal as well?

    With that being said, property owners have always been informed that the proper Owner held responsible for sidewalks.

    Do you want to get into the scheme of this program at a cost of taxpayers’ money? Wouldn’t say Moses. 🙂

    There is something to the property owners being helped out for the sidewalk decade due to public use. A more equitable and accountable process is a tax deduction for repairs on the property. The city proves the total tax reduction before the owner hires and pays the contractor of their choice contractor for the work. There should be a cap to what the city will pay/deduct for the property taxes as well matrix for the size, and scope.

    A scheme is a scheme especially when taxpayers are footing the bill, Right Moses 🤣

    Looks like Shelton is taking a page out of Port’s playbook, retarded-ass decisions/ perhaps not, in this political game, at the cost of the tax base. Good Job Shelton 🤣

    https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/fired-shelton-officers-get-4-8-million-settlement-19832004.php

    0
  3. As I’d contemplated going to service this Sunday morning, breathing in the fresh aroma of a brewed cup of coffee was the subversive lie as a means, rational that debased. Shit like that irks me in the evolutional, conscience game in the battle for humanity.

    What say you Juan V 🙂

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT5qrngSWhA

    P.S speaking of bats, let’s not forget you’ll pray and are part of the team of the same God, JS.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHH9EYZHoVU

    0
  4. My bad Sweden 🙂

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsyTgoRnJUU

    Here’s a human scientific story. My frist and only science fair was when I was in James J. Curiale held at UB. It was based on Einstein’s Noble Prize, the photoelectric effect, AKA Solar Power/Panels. To be fair it was a collaboration. What was his name? Oh yeah, Robert Teixeira. AKA Subaru Bob. 🙂

    We did win Port. 🤣

    True story.

    I depart this freak show friends, Port, and OIB with Rob Base and EZ Rock.

    Peace out people.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phOW-CZJWT0

    0

Leave a Reply