Property Maintenance Ordinance Passes With Changes Possible

After several meetings of figuring out how they wanted a , the Howell Township Council adopted a final version of the ordinance on Tuesday after more questions were raised by members of the public.

There was more than an hour of public comment about different aspects of the ordinance. Residents focused on whether they could park items such as campers and boats on their property depending on the size of their lots. Others asked whether living in more rural parts of the town should afford them the ability to use their property in a different way than the more developed sections.

Other residents were concerned that they own trucks and recreational vehicles that come in sizes that would be outlawed by the ordinance.

UP FOR ADOPTION

While council adopted the ordinance Tuesday, there was agreement that it could be changed in the future. That came after much discussion by the members about whether they wanted to vote for it in the first place. In the end Councilman Juan Malave was the only member on the dais to vote no.  

Deputy Mayor William Gotto asked Township Attorney McKenna Kingdon whether in light of information provided by the residents if the council could change sizes in the ordinance without a new public hearing. Kingdon said a change like that would constitute a major change and therefore require a new round of public hearings. 

"I heard some things that I thought were valid," said Mayor Robert Walsh about the public comments particularly in separating the developed parts of town from the more rural parts. "For somebody in a pretty rural area in the southern part of town, I mean, should their three-quarter acre lot be looked at the same as a three-quarter acre lot in Glen Arden," he added.

The question brought up a topic that had been mentioned several times during the meeting in the role of Code Enforcement Officer Chris Jackson. "We know that Mr. Jackson would have no choice or his department to go out there if there was a complaint," said the mayor. "There's a law on the books, a neighbor complains, somebody complains. Mr. Jackson has to go and everybody has to be treated equally."

Walsh asked if those people could then go to the governing body and get relief, which Kingdon said they could. That was met by some resistence from the other members of the council. "If you think it's going to be an issue then we should address it now and modify it now," said Kingdon. "I don't want to make it a habit to have you have to grant relief from something that we're just adopting now."

At that time Kingdon offered a compromise solution, which was to adopt the ordinance as it was written and then make changes to areas of question down the road. "Then you're dealing only with that particular section," she said. "You're not keeping open the entire concept of the ordinance."

Gotto said he supported that idea especially in light of the fact that many of the comments on Tuesday focused not on the ordinance itself but on the section which focuses on motorized boats, campers and recreation trailers. "I can't say that I wouldn't support the ordinance in its entirety because the scope of it is necessary and warranted and timely and we should be doing it now," he said. To not adopt the entire ordinance because of one section would "not solve anything," he added. 

"Subjectivity in ordinances and governments is not a good thing," he said. "I understand the clause and I know why it's there and I know Mr. Jackson well and I feel very confident that this is not a witch hunt going after people with boats that are 25 feet and bigger."

In an effort to alleviate the concerns of residents Councilman Robert Nicastro suggested the council do more research. That includes reaching out to companies that make recreational vehicles and boats to see what the common sizes are that would make the ordinance easier to apply. "Lets get some clarity on what the sizes of RV's and boats are and I think that's how we can plug in numbers," he said.

A DIFFICULT VOTE

It was Nicastro that moved for the ordinance to be adopted but a second was not quick to come behind him. In the end Walsh handed the gavel to Gotto and seconded the motion himself. When he was called on Malave gave the lone no vote without any further information.

After the meeting the newest member of the council said he had questions about the ordinance that he still needed answered. "I didn't like the idea of modification provision leaving too much up to the interpretation of the code enforcement, whoever he or she might be," he said. "I think it should be our responsibility to tweak the ordinance in such a way that it doesn't impact as many residents as came out tonight to voice an opinion."

No matter the compromises the council made with the ordinance Malave said he knew there would still be unhappy residents that it would impact. "What's going to happen is that at some point we by Councilman Nicastro's reccommendation will go out, get the exact measurements of all these vehicles and I think we're going to come back and make an informed and educated decision as to what the right and fair length should be."

Councilwoman Pauline Smith voted in favor of the ordinance and explained her reasoning before casting her vote. "This is a very emotional thing for me," she said. "Every time it has been very restrictive and I see a need for something that takes care of health, safety and welfare of people."

With the current council Smith said, "We have made an effort to do the best job we know how and where things have come to light to be as little intrusive and controlling as we possibly can and still maintain some kind of order over what needs to be taken care of," she said. 

"Even though I'm torn because we put so much into it and tried to make it so fair, recognize the difference between a rural lifestyle and people who live in developments unfortunately there's a little bit of fringe that has to be taken care of and hopefully we will."

When she announced she would be voting in favor of the ordinance an audible gasp could be heard from members of the audience. "Thank you for taking all of the people into consideration," she concluded.

Gotto took his time in considering his vote in its entirety. "I'm not in favor of certain portions of this. I do appreciate the residents that came out and hung out this long to go through this," he said. "I know some of you are going to be affected by the vote but I am in favor of this because of issues that don't have much to do with the section that I referenced before." 

Gotto said the ordinance was about more than lot sizes and boats and trailers and campers. "I do believe that overall the visual aesthetic of the town has deteriorated," he said. "That was the motivating factor of how we got to this point," he said. "I am going to vote in favor of it, but I will strongly urge a revision to 302.10."

Mayor Walsh was more assertive in his vote in passing the ordinance. "I think this whole ordinance is long overdue. I think it's been built on compromise and give and take and information between residents, code enforcement, our attorney, our manager, the governing body," he said. 

The mayor also agreed that the lot and vehicles sizes was a small part of the bigger picture of the ordinance. "It never was my intent or the intent of the governing body to be intrusive or cause any kind of harm to anybody's way of life," he said. "It really is more about protecting the beauty of Howell Township and the residents of Howell Township."

He also said he was in favor of seeing changes to the areas where residents raised questions that could help make the ordinance work better with their situations.