Maintenance law can charge $500 minimum Borough bill will not be ‘economically pleasing’ to property owners

Maintenance law can
charge $500 minimum
Borough bill will not be ‘economically pleasing’
to property owners

EATONTOWN — Despite complaints that it’s too intrusive, the Borough Council has adopted a property-maintenance ordinance that imposes a fine of no less than $500 on violators.

The measure was passed 5-1 with Councilman Charles E. Davis casting the lone nay at the council’s Oct. 24 meeting.

The ordinance, which amends an existing property-maintenance ordinance, seeks to put teeth into the earlier law by allowing the borough to more quickly take action to clean up or cut grass on overgrown or debris-littered properties.

Borough Attorney Gene Anthony said the ordinance was primarily aimed at commercial properties like the Brazilian Barbeque and the Shell gas station on Route 35 that were not being maintained; however, it also applies to private residences.

Walter Biernacki of Lafetre Avenue asked whether code enforcement officers or other borough officials could enter someone’s back yard to inspect it. He was told that they could, but that most likely they would not unless they had received a complaint about it, probably from a neighbor.

Roy Eisen of Byrnes Lane, who is seeking election to the Borough Council as a Republican, noted that the ordinance directs all owners or tenants of properties abutting a highway or public street to trim all trees, bushes and hedges that have become impediments to the highway, street or sidewalk. He asked whether that conflicted with a tree-trimming ordinance the council had considered.

He was reminded that the tree-trimming ordinance was allowed to die at the previous council meeting after the council found it too flawed to pass, and he was told there would be a conflict only if it were passed in its original form.

That proposed ordinance would have required property owners to file a plan with the borough on how they wanted to trim trees or bushes in the public right of way by streets, and to obtain a permit before cutting them.

The council plans to redraft the tree-trimming ordinance and narrow its application.

"I’m just bringing it up because I think you could have a conflict down the road," Eisen said about his reason for pointing out the differing approaches.

Steve Lasoff of Wyckoff Road cited the provision in the property-maintenance ordinance that prohibits weeds, grass, brush or plant growth from being more than 10 inches high, except for cultivated flowers and gardens. He said the proposal simply went too far.

"It seems really intrusive," he complained.

Councilman John J. Collins said Lasoff had a valid point and proposed an amendment that the council approved changing the wording from "all exterior property and premises" shall be maintained free from growth over 10 inches high to "all areas of cultivated lawn." He noted that some people might want to leave part of their property in a natural condition, particularly if it abuts a park or woodland. The amendment was passed 5-1, with Davis voting no.

Councilman John M. Kleinfelder objected to amending the ordinance any further, saying it had been the council’s intent to make it tight.

Anthony reminded council members that he had sent them a letter saying he thought the ordinance was overly intrusive but that they had expressed confidence that Brian Denegar, part-time code enforcement officer for fire prevention and property maintenance, would enforce it properly.

Members of the audience expressed concern, however, that it could be mishandled and misused in the future by a successor to Denegar.

Davis said after the meeting that he had voted against the ordinance because he felt it was too intrusive, just as the residents had said.

He said he also felt it unnecessary. If there’s an unsanitary condition now, the health department is called, he noted. He said the new ordinance turns "the style police" loose on the town.

"I was a cop for 26 years," he said. "I think we have enough laws now to deal with any situation you’d meet. It’s regulation upon regulation.

"My fear…is that if we get somebody who isn’t attuned to a neighborhood, he could come in and forbid them, using this ordinance," Davis added.

The ordinance would allow the borough to cut grass, destroy weeds or correct any other prohibited condition 10 days after notifying a property owner of a violation and then bill that person or place a lien on the property if he or she doesn’t pay.

Borough Business Administrator Michael L. Trotta said after the meeting that the borough isn’t going to make it "economically pleasing" to property owners who leave the work to the borough. He said the bill will include not only the cost of cutting the grass, destroying the weeds or cleaning up the place, but the cost of supervision and administration as well.

Trotta said the ordinance was needed because under the old law, property owners could stall and drag out the process with court postponements.

"You can play the system to get through the summer," he explained.