Archives

Letter: Sidewalks need to be fixed before they can be shoveled


Published: February 12, 2008

To the editor:

Regarding the Thursday, Feb. 7, story on the Salem page headlined, "City to consider piling on fines for unshoveled walks":

Reading this piece assures me that spring is around the corner. No robins yet, but daylight hours are on the increase. We are mid-point in the winter solstice and once again we hear people saying, "Let's get tough on unshoveled walks."

This certainly warrants a special meeting of the City Council. There's money to made here, after all.

Before Ward 6 Councilor Paul Prevey becomes unrestrained in his exuberance to make all things right, let us look at the whole picture.

Reference is made to the ordinance making building owners responsible for removing snow and ice from their sidewalk within a specific time frame. Article 1, Sec. 38-13 and Sec. 38-14 "Removal of snow from sidewalks," addresses this matter as stated.

The foregoing addresses the responsibility of the homeowner. But there are two parties involved, each with their own community responsibility, the other party being the City of Salem. In this time of economic stress we are coming to learn that we must function more than as a city, we must come together as a community to solve our problems. It does not always produce the ideal solution, but rather one each side can live with in relative harmony.

Sec. 38-165: "Maintenance by city. Every sidewalk constructed under this division shall thereafter be kept in repair by the director of public services at the expense of the city."

Now we have a "shared responsibility." My being able to meet my responsibility under Article 1, Sec. 38-13, "Removal of snow from sidewalks," is predicated on the city meeting its responsibility that the sidewalk in question is in a state of repair conducive to the use of a shovel.

If you have a brick sidewalk like I do, that may not be possible. Each brick is a separate and distinct walking surface. Each one rises and falls at a different rate. It gives undulation new meaning.

For 15 years I have complained on an annual basis, all to no avail. I understand this is a labor-intensive matter. Translation: It costs too much to repair.

That's fine; I have no problem with that. That is until I am told that I will incur a fine for noncompliance, while the city bears no equal burden. Now you want to increase that penalty while still looking the other way. That, my friends, is what is known as dictatorial and oppressive government. The illusional partnership is exposed.

If Councilor Prevey is intent on doing good, perhaps I could point him in a new direction: Establish fines of significant value to contractors who plow either for the city or for private entities who move snow from private property, churches included, not only into the street, but across the street and up against the opposite walkway. Establish fines for not only city workers, but private contractors who plow snow into and block access to "parking for disabled." This occurs with every snowstorm that requires plowing.

This is not a matter that needs to be solved for now. It is a matter that needs to be addressed now so that new regulations are in place for next winter. By the time everyone sits down, winter will be gone.

Salem has the burden of being "historic." That means that the past gets in the way of the present. We need to prioritize what can be discarded to move on.

KENNETH BONACCI

Salem