No Scarlet Letters Here

Abandoned house (but not the property) on South East Street

So to repeat what I wrote yesterday about the coordinated PR surge Amherst and UMass are now jointly putting forth on the their solutions to problem party houses in town, I question if either has the will to actually back up their tough talk.  And now, for your consideration, I present exhibit B:

Board of Health Problem Houses

Interesting that this "list" of dwellings the Board of Health has dealt with since the June 30 start of FY13 does not give exact addresses?

When a public health problem rises to the level of being placed on a watch list, that list becomes a public document.   And since the Board of Health is an investigatory body with state mandated powers I assume they put the exact address on their list.

So why protect them from public exposure?  Don't neighbors have a right to know about a problem house in their neighborhood (although they are usually all too familiar).  Isn't that why the state has a Sex Offender rule for public exposure of their whereabouts?

Notice the Board of Health has issued only one fine (to a house somewhere on Glendale Road) out of the 60 or so locations on the list, or under 2%.  No indication if it was for the $50 minimum or $1,000 maximum, or anywhere in between.

And it's also interesting that this fine was issued only last week.  Since this powerpoint slide is to be presented tomorrow night to the Amherst Select Board as part of the Town Manager's report on "Safe and Healthy Neighborhoods", a conspiracy theorist might think they just randomly picked one token house to fine in order to demonstrate toughness. 

At least the 9/13 basement apartment fire at Gilreath Manor on Hobart Lane shows up (but only as "Hobart Lane").  At least we now have an official admission from the town that those basement apartments were indeed illegal.  And they have given the owners an "Order To Correct"... at least.

That seems to be an apt description for the efforts the town and UMass are showing for enforcement action:  At least.

And a sternly worded letter too!

AFD Central Open House

The quint reaches up over Amherst center into a brilliant blue sky

Unfortunately I could not make my annual trek to the top of the ladder towering over Amherst center because Ladder 1 is in need of repair for the electronics that make the big stick go up and maneuver, so today the quint with a smaller and more difficult ladder apparatus was on display instead.

Target practice with a fire extinguisher

And the Chief was worried about liability should I take a tumble (I do get a tad preoccupied when framing a photo).

Jaws of Life make short work of entering a crumpled vehicle

But as always seems to be the case, the weather was perfect -- a crisp day of radiant sunshine under an almost cloudless blue sky ... a haunting reminder of the potential cost these public safety stalwarts deal with daily.

Unlike last year Smokey Bear managed to make it this time around

Ladder points to a commercial jet's  vapor trail

Crying Wolf?

Two days before the "Celebrate Amherst Block Party"-- the inaugural debut of the Business Improvement District -- the Amherst Board of Health issued a stern public health advisory/warning to stay indoors to avoid contracting a mosquito borne illness.

The next day they pretty much retracted it -- at least for the downtown block party. So I wonder how seriously local landlords are going to take this threat of heavy fines from the Board of Health for having a slumlike demeanor?

After all, the town's Nuisance House Bylaw has always had the provision for fining property owners $300 for the actions of their rowdy tenants ... but have never employed it.

And even when serious -- potentially life threatening -- infractions are found, like faulty smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, blocked fire escapes, or illegal bedrooms in basements without a second means of egress, the town seems to do nothing of note to the rental property owners.

Board of Health Nuisance Threat

The (less than) 1%

Storm clouds over UMass/Amherst 

So out of 652 UMass students cited by APD for bad behavior last year only 5 were expelled.  Yeah, five.  Three quarters of 1%, but I bet the UMass spinmeisters will round up to the whopping 1%.

Although UMass probably stopped giving the offenders oatmeal cookies as well. That certainly ought to do it.

The problem with using citations/arrests as a baseline is that those numbers don't always reflect the true gravity of a particular situation, simply because outnumbered police don't have the time or personnel required to arrest/cite all the offenders.

Take the Meadow Street Riot from last year for instance.  Only one person was cited by police (and he was not expelled) but far more than that hurled objects at police.  At the very least, that particular nitwit should be gone.

And another of the more riotous/dangerous party incidents with assaults on APD resulted in, at most, 2-out-of-5 expulsions (assuming they simply did not flunk out on their own).

UMass should  append the Code of Student Conduct to clearly state that any incident of resisting arrest or assaults on a police officer -- spitting, shoving, punching/kicking, or using them for target practice with hurled objects -- is grounds for immediate expulsion.

And sure, with party house citations -- be it civil or criminal -- everybody is entitled to a second chance (assuming the charge is not assault on an officer) ... but on the second offense, OUT.

Same goes for DUI.

Maybe they will be serving chocolate chip cookies


Student Conduct Stats

Never Mind

The incomparable Rosanne Rosannadanna

From: XXX
To: amherstac@aol.com
Sent: Tue, Oct 9, 2012 2:49 pm

Hi Mr. Kelley,

My name is XXX and recently you posted in your "Only in the Republic of Amherst" blog about myself and my three roommates that were (unfortunately) arrested for violating the town's noise by-laws.

I understand this information is public knowledge, and you have every right to post it, but I'd like to ask that you at least edit the post and remove the comment about us being "obstinate."

This is a false statement. Even if you were to refer to the police report, there are no suggestions that myself nor my roommate XY acted in an obstinate manner with the police.

Again, I would very much appreciate you doing this,

Best,

XXX

#### 

From: XXX
To: amherstac@aol.com
Sent: Wed, Oct 10, 2012 9:38 am

Hi Mr. Kelley,

This is in regards to the previous email I sent you.

I have just spoken with my landlord and I would like to retract what I said and requested.

Despite my perspective of what happened Friday night and my behavior, I understand there are different opinions among others, perhaps such as yourself. Based on your opinion, you have every right to post that we acted in an obstinate manner.

I apologize for my original email, and can assure you that my roommates and myself have learned our lesson and you will never have a need to post about us again! (at least for this kind of reason)

Have a great day,

 XXX

Amherst/Hamp ReBID

Amherst BID website (nice header photo)

On August 7 Governor Patrick signed into law a change affecting Business Improvement Disticts, a tweak that will have a profound impact on a minority of businesses located within the target area, namely those who originally "opted out" of the enterprise (thus avoiding the increased taxation assessment, but also the benefits).

And neither Amherst or Northampton are grandfathered from these changes.

Now a BID, rather than being given a lifetime operation permit at inception, has to be renewed every five years by a simple majority vote, and businesses originally allowed to opt out can no longer avoid paying the higher surcharge if the majority votes in favor. 

In other words, you are in whether you like it or not.

 Alex Krogh-Grabbe addresses Amherst Select Board mid-July (hence the sandals)

According to Amherst BID Director Alex Krogh-Grabbe, "Twenty one of 92 property owners within the district opted out initially, representing 17% of the property value & 15% of the properties within the district."

The increased tax burden falls on the property owner not the business renting the commercial space, although any increase in overhead for an owner is usually passed on to tenants.

 UMass and Amherst College, as tax-exempt property owners in the downtown district, cannot be assessed fees but have volunteered to pay $15,000 each annually plus assist with in kind contributions such as providing interns and distributing promotional materials to students.

The Amherst BID is still in its rookie year of operation, so they are in no great hurry to take a revote (which can happen anytime within five years of the 8/7/12 change in the law).  Krogh-Grabbe states the Amherst vote will take place sometime in early 2013,  "after all affected property owners understand what the change means".

In Northampton the BID was bitterly opposed by reclusive entertainment mogul Eric Suher, so it will be interesting to see his reaction to this heavy handed change in the rules that will cost him thousands of dollars annually.

At least in Amherst, businesses have a few months to get used to it.

Yet Another Smoking Gun

Email sent by AFD to select influential Amherst individuals:

From: "McKay, Donald" <McKayD@amherstma.gov>
Date: September 18, 2012 1:44:49 PM EDT

I thought that I would apprise you of a situation in which your assistance would be welcomed. Last Thursday the Fire Department responded to a basement fire at # 28 Hobart Lane. 28 Hobart Lane is one of the 14 units that Lincoln Realty owns and manages in the 3 apartment buildings collectively called Gillreath Manor Apartments. The basement contained 2 illegal bedrooms. One of these would be considered to be OK as a bedroom with some modifications as directed by the Building Commissioner. The second bedroom 1) physically cannot be used as bedroom and 2) exceeds the maximum occupancy of 4.

Currently, the Fire Department, Health Department, and Building Commissioners office are awaiting the opportunity to inspect all 14 units in the complex. On Monday the 17^th of September, we were invited to inspect 2 of the 14 units. We observed two rooms, constructed without permits, in each basement with no beds contained therein. We did observe two beds that had been stacked beneath the stairs in each occupancy.

The issue: We have one email and now one phone call from the displaced occupants that clearly indicate that they have been instructed by Lincoln reality to remove the evidence of the two illegal bedrooms until after the combined inspections. We are working with the University to acquire permanent residence hall accommodations for the 14 students who will be displaced from the 5^th bedroom in each unit. It appears that the 28 students displaced from the basement bedrooms are in need of temporary accommodations and I believe that Lincoln Realty needs to step up and procure these temporary living arrangements.

The charade needs to end and these kids need safe housing.. To date, we believe that we (the combined inspection departments) have not proceeded in an untoward manner, we have withheld action through an administrative search warrant instead seeking to act cooperatively with Lincoln Realty to inspect the apartments and we are very cautiously approaching a cease and desist order to compel Lincoln Realty to reduce the occupancy of the apartments to 4.

Any assistance you may be able to provide in motivating Lincoln Realty to provide the necessary temporary housing would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Don

Assistant Chief Donald R. McKay, EMT-P, MPH

Amherst Fire Department

Discussion on UMass Reddit