Public Offers Comments on Latest Revisions To Blight Ordinance

About 20 people attended a public hearing on the revision of Windsor Locks’ blight ordinance at town hall Tuesday.

This was the second public hearing held about changing the existing Blight Ordinance, which was adopted at a town meeting in January 2001. The first public hearing about the new ordinance was held at the high school last September.

Town Attorney Scott R. Chadwick, of the law firm Chadwick and Stone, located in East Hartford, gave a brief overview to the crowd about the process of changing the ordinance, which started a year ago, and the changes to it. The new ordinance is modeled on Derby’s blight ordinance.

The major change in the new ordinance is the definition section, which is “the guts of the ordinance,” Chadwick said. This is where blight is defined, he added.

The current ordinance gave definitions to apply in the interpretation and enforcement of the ordinance. There are definitions for issues of debris, decay, dilapidated, mechanical equipment, and natural field state in the current ordinance.

The new ordinance refers to “blighted premises as any building, structure, or parcel of land,” which falls under six categories. Some of these categories in the new ordinance are the building official documents a building as becoming dilapidated, the police department documents the property as attracting illegal activity, or the building is deemed a fire hazard by the Fire Marshal.

Chadwick said he started the process of improving the existing ordinance not creating a new one by taking a tour of the town with First Selectmen Steve N. Wawruck, Jr.,  Police Chief John Suchocki, and Police Captain Chester DeGray to “view different situations and examples where the current blight ordinance may have deficiencies.” He wanted to take the theoretical and apply it to the practical, he said.

“What we discovered is our definition section has some gaps or holes in it,” Chadwick said.

During the process concerns came up about anonymous complaints, Chadwick said. In the current ordinance, a person had to fill out a form, which may have discouraged people from coming forward, he said.

With the new ordinance, a person can make a complaint to the First Selectmen and the selectmen can put their name on the form so the person can remain anonymous, Chadwick said.

Selectman Joseph R. Calsetta said he has received a number of blight complaints where he has signed his name to with the current ordinance because people wanted to stay anonymous.

One concerned resident, Nick, said he thinks the blight ordinance is important, but was wondering why a public hearing was happening in the summer when people are on gone on vacation.
“I’m left with the impression that the board of selectmen wants a public hearing without the public,” Nick said.

Malcolm Hamilton and Martha Jarvis both brought up a few blighted properties in town. Jarvis asked what she could do to help.

Calsetta told Jarvis the first thing she needs to do is fill out a blight complaint.
Jarvis did like that anonymity in the new ordinance since she had a person come to her home a few years ago about a complaint she made on that person.

Gayle Barrington said there should be some middle ground between anonymous and protection for the person from someone showing up at their door.

“A person should be on record even if it is a protected record,” Barrington said.

Barrington also spoke about the wording in the ordinance. She has been on the receiving end of a letter stating there was blight on her property. She wants to be able to receive more information about what a person is complaining about so it can be resolved, which she doesn’t feel happens if the complainant is anonymous.

Chadwick told Barrington there are checks and balances within the complaint process. The first selectmen or a person designated by them will determine if the complaint satisfies the conditions of the blight ordinance.

“Blight is a subjective art not an objective art,” Calsetta said.

Selectwoman Denise T. Balboni said a record should be maintained and made public on a monthly or quarterly basis about the properties in town that has been cited for blight and the progress the property owner in dealing with the citation.

Wawruck said the ordinance will again be reviewed by the board of selectmen with the comments of the public hearing in mind.