Latest news with #NiagaraGazette
Yahoo
a day ago
- General
- Yahoo
'Garden of Love' making a comeback after city's removal
Slowly but surely the garden in front of the house on Ontario Avenue in Niagara Falls is beginning to grow again. The occupants of the house — Kenneth Johnson, Justine Burger and their three children, ages 2, 4 and 15 — are now looking forward to full bloom, the time when their flowers blossom and their raspberries, corn, green beans, zucchini, bell papers, cherry and Roma tomatoes ripen to the point where they are ready to be picked. They've added a few new touches this year. Four raised garden beds were donated by the Niagara Beautification Commission. Multi-colored lights to brighten up the space at night. A wooden 'welcome' sign, donated by a friend of Burger's grandmother. Burger said she's also working on a special touch of her own, a sign that will describe the space for what it is today — a 'Garden of Love.' It's intended as a nod to the outpouring of support Johnson and Burger's household received after city workers, acting on April 21 in response to Clean Neighborhood violations, removed all remnants of the garden they grew and tended in the front yard last year. 'We're getting there,' Burger said. 'We are.' Following media reports from multiple local news outlets, including the Niagara Gazette, hundreds of people from across the city and around the region, and even a couple from other parts of the country, reached out to offer their support. Some of those same people donated money to a GoFundMe account established to help Johnson and Burger cover the fines the city charged them for the cleanup. Thanks to their generosity, the couple managed to raise the full $2,296 to pay the bill, which they said they intend to do soon. 'The community and our neighbors have been outstanding,' Burger said. 'I'm so thankful to everybody who donated money for us and for even just the words of encouragement,' she added. 'The money isn't even that big of a deal. We're working people so we would have figured it out. But just receiving words of encouragement from people we have never met in our lives, that we cannot appreciate enough.' Mayor Robert Restaino's administration, in a nine-page press release, defended the city's actions, saying they came in response to complaints about the condition of the property and that the DPW documented multiple violations of the clean neighborhood ordinance on site. The ordinance allows the city to penalize residents and property owners for failing to address various violating conditions, which can include yard waste, overgrown grass and unregistered vehicles stored on the property. In its release, the mayor's administration said that following a review it concluded that the DPW handled the matter appropriately and within enforcement actions covered under the ordinance. The administration also insisted that, at the time of the DPW crew's visit, the couple's front yard looked more like a neglected lawn full of logs and bricks than a well-tended garden. During the cleanup, crew members removed logs, painted bricks and cinder blocks from the property, including those planted into the ground along the public right-of-way, the space between the sidewalk and the street. City officials said the items posed tripping hazards and, therefore, warranted removal. In addition, during their visit to the house, city workers removed several items from the side of the house and the backyard, including a refrigerator with a door on it that city officials said posed a potential hazard to children. Burger and Johnson are confining their new garden to the area between their front porch and the sidewalk, heeding the city's advice to keep the right-of-way free from logs, bricks and plantings. The couple said Mother Nature is proving less cooperative and sunflowers planted near the street edge are growing again. 'I honestly don't know what to do with it because everything is coming back up. There's sunflowers that are straight-growing. I can't stop that,' Johnson said. Neither Mayor Restaino nor City Council Chairman Jim Perry have contacted the couple in the weeks since their story went viral. They did receive personal visits and help in fixing up the property in front of the house from several other local political figures, including Falls Councilman Donta Myles, council candidate Noah Munoz and two candidates for Niagara County Legislature, Donte Richardson and Sean Mapp. Johnson and Burger say they're trying to get past the politics of the situation and are instead focusing on making sure their garden looks good this year. 'I'm just happy that we were able to bounce back,' Johnson said. 'That's what I'm happy about.'
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Yahoo
Mayor's office addresses Ontario Avenue garden removal
Mayor Robert Restaino's office issued a lengthy statement late Wednesday, suggesting 'sensational and misinformed' reporting about a city cleanup at an Ontario Avenue property where a family previously maintained a front yard garden has led to threats of harm against staff at the city's Department of Public Works. The nine-page statement, which included nine photos of the exterior of the property at 2627 Ontario Ave., was sent by Restaino's brother, City Administrator Anthony Restaino, to the Niagara Gazette and other Western New York media outlets at 4:16 p.m. Wednesday. It was delivered more than two days after the administration failed to answer an email from a Gazette reporter who requested copies of any photos the city took of the property, more detailed information about any complaints filed about its condition and an opportunity to interview Department of Public Works Director Ken Tompkins or another representative from the administration who could discuss the situation. That request followed an April 24 Gazette email to the city administrator asking to speak with Tompkins about the matter. Restaino's statement also follows reports on Tuesday filed from local news stations WGRZ, WIVB and WKBW, with each of those outlets noting the administration did not make available any representative for comment and indicated instead that it would issue a statement on Wednesday. The statement references what the mayor's office describes as 'an unfortunate effect' the reporting has had in 'feeding the anger' of some of the 'citizen's lesser angels.' It concludes with a finding following a review by the administration that Tompkins and his staff handled the matter appropriately and within keeping with enforcement actions covered under the city's clean neighborhood ordinances. 'The administrative staff of DPW have now started receiving phone calls threatening their safety based on a belief that the city has targeted a family rather than the unsafe and unlawful conditions that the family created both on public property and the private property that they rent,' the statement reads. 'The Clean Team has one of the toughest jobs in the city, and they should never be vilified for doing their jobs and following the laws and the ordinances that were passed on the local and federal level.' The Niagara Gazette first reported on Friday that the occupants of the property — Justine Burger and Kenneth Johnson — felt the city went too far by sending a crew of DPW employees to their house on the day after Easter to remove cinder blocks, logs and other items they say were part of a front-yard garden they maintained with their three children, ages 2, 4 and 15. Burger said the family started planting flowers and vegetables in the front yard after her teenage son, who has autism, came home from school excited about a sunflower he planted as part of a school project. City workers, responding to a neighbor complaint and what officials have said were multiple violations of the city's clean neighborhood ordinance, also removed several items from the couple's backyard, including a refrigerator with a door on it that DPW representatives told the couple posed a potential hazard to children. On Monday, the newspaper reported that the city later billed Burger and Johnson for $2,296 to cover the cleanup cost, which included a charge for the weight of the materials removed from their property. It was reported on Wednesday that a GoFundMe campaign has raised enough money to cover the city's bill. The mayor's statement notes that, under the city's clean neighborhood ordinances, adopted in 1987, the DPW is largely responsible for enforcement actions against private property owners and occupants. The ordinance also allows the city to issue orders of cleanup to owners and occupants of property that itemize the violations to be corrected. Under city law, offenders are given a 'reasonable' amount of time, not to exceed 10 days from the date of the order, to correct any violations. The city is also allowed, by law, to seek reimbursement from the property occupants or owners for the cost of cleanup services rendered. The statement from the mayor's office indicates that the response from the city was not prompted by the condition of the front yard as depicted in photos taken by the family and published in the Niagara Gazette on Saturday and again on Tuesday. Those photos showed Burger, Johnson and their children in the front yard in what appeared to be a well-tended garden. The administration, using imagery taken from Google Earth, concluded that the family's photos could not have been taken in 2020, 2021 or 2022 and could only have been taken during the growing season in 2024 or 2023 at the earliest, which the mayor's office contends contradicts the couple's contention that they have been growing the garden in the front yard for the past five years. The couple told the Gazette that they have lived at the property for five years and had been growing the garden for 'several years.' The administration said DPW crews cleaned up the property following neighbor complaints registered with at least two council members and complaints filed on the city's 311 complaint system starting in December of 2024. The statement indicates that the most recent complaint was received on March 21, prompting a city Clean Team inspector to visit the address on April 3 to take photographs of violations and attach an order of clean up to the front porch. The same day, the administration says the order of clean-up was mailed to both the owner of the property in Amherst, as well as to the occupants. 'All this was done in compliance with the relevant portions of the Clean Neighborhoods Ordinance as they have existed since 1987,' the administration's statement notes. The administration also notes while the owner's front property line follows the edge of the concrete public sidewalk closest to the front of the home, the grassy margin that extends from the street and over the entire width of the concrete public sidewalk represents the city's right-of-way. The administration said orange and painted bricks and cinder blocks placed on the grass margin, as well as on top of the concrete sidewalk, by the property's occupants posed tripping hazards and, therefore, warranted removal. The administration contends pieces of wood and other items encroached on a driveway next to the house also required removal as the driveway belongs to the property next door, not the house in question. 'Regardless of whether someone sees this cinder block and log garden as attractive or not, the occupant's decision to take over the city's right of way – specifically, the grassy area in the foreground which, by definition, is part of the sidewalk and therefore intended for pedestrian use – represents multiple violations of city ordinances, as well as federal law known as the Americans with Disabilities Act,' the statement from the mayor's office reads. The administration's statement came with an April 21 photo taken before the clean team started working at the property as evidence that 'little to no efforts' were taken by the occupants or the owner to remove the violations that were noted 18 days before the city issued its April 3 order of cleanup. Both Burger and Johnson have said that they believe the city could have handled the situation differently while Burger said she understood what the city was trying to accomplish with the clean neighborhood ordinances but that she felt the process was 'flawed.' Restaino's administration said it disagrees. 'The public should also know that every workday, the Clean Team performs between six to 20 clean-ups on private property under Chapter 738 with no complaints being registered,' the administration said in its statement.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Yahoo
Perry defends city's actions on 'garden' property
Niagara Falls City Council Chairman Jim Perry on Tuesday strongly defended the city's decision to issue clean neighborhood ordinance violations and deliver a cleanup bill totaling nearly $2,300 to the occupants of an Ontario Avenue home where family members have maintained a garden covering the front yard for several years. In defending the city's actions as justified, Perry publicly chastised the newspaper's coverage of the situation in a social media post that was shared on the official Facebook page of the mayor of the City of Niagara Falls. That criticism comes despite the paper's repeated attempts to contact city officials about the property. Perry suggested in his post that the Gazette failed to document the true condition of the property, which the newspaper described in two previous stories as having a garden planted in the front yard by the occupants — Justine Burger, her fiancee Kenneth Johnson, and their three children, ages 2, 4 and 15. In his post, Perry said the photo used for the previous Gazette story, which was taken from the couple's Facebook page, was 'in no way representative of what the house looked like' when the city began investigating complaints about the property's condition. 'I was always one who was very much in support of my hometown newspaper,' Perry wrote. 'I always thought it was necessary to bring real news to the community. People who pointed to the news and said it was biased were just disgruntled, but a recent articles in the Niagara Gazette has me on the verge of canceling my subscription. I know it is no big deal, just one more person deciding not to buy the local paper, but now that I am in the government and I see the facts and then see the one-sided articles being written, I can't sit quietly without saying something.' In his post, Perry described the newspaper's report not as a news story but rather a 'blatant twist of facts.' Perry said he received 'many complaints' from neighbors about the condition of the couple's property. He posted on social media several photos he said he received weeks before the city took any action. The Gazette published some of those photos as part of today's coverage. 'One of the neighbors wrote to me that these conditions have been like this for over two years, and it was time something was done,' Perry said. 'They told me the condition of the home was attracting rats due to feces in the yard being left there and not being disposed of.' What Perry did not acknowledge in his post, despite a request from the newspaper to do so, was that the Gazette emailed City Administrator Anthony Restaino at 11 a.m. Monday, requesting additional information about the property and asking if the administration could share any photos or prior complaints about its condition. 'We welcome any comment the city may have and I would welcome the opportunity to speak directly to DPW Director Ken Tompkins if the administration clears him to do so,' the reporter noted in Monday's email. 'Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.' The city administrator did not respond to the email, nor did any representative from the administration. That followed a request sent to the city administrator on April 23 asking to speak with someone from the city about the situation. Burger's family has in recent years used the front of the property they have rented at 2627 Ontario Ave. as an area for planting flowers and vegetables. Their garden area included cinderblocks and logs and extended from their porch to the sidewalk and from the sidewalk to the street, an area that is considered part of the public right of way. On April 21 — the Monday after Easter — a crew from the city's Department of Public Works visited the property and hauled away the cinder blocks, logs and other materials. The crew also cleaned up the side of the house and the backyard, where they removed a refrigerator with a door on it that DPW officials said posed a danger to children. On Monday, Anthony Restaino said the cleanup followed an April 3 notice to the occupants of violations of the city's Clean Neighborhood Ordinance, which enforces standards for property maintenance and cleanliness, including waste disposal, vehicle storage, and grass length. The ordinance allows the city to remove any 'violating condition' and seek reimbursement of 'cleanup costs, disbursement and handling fee and an administrative penalty payable by the owner or occupant. Burger said DPW crew members told her they were sent to the house in response to a complaint from an unidentified neighbor. She said she was told by a secretary in the DPW office that the complaint was received on March 21. She said the same secretary also told her the complaint had been 'cleared' on April 14, about a week before city crews arrived to clear out her property. On Friday, Burger and Johnson received a bill from the city for $2,296 that included costs for the cleanup as well as a charge based on the weight of the materials removed from the property by DPW employees. In an interview on Tuesday, Burger said the photos taken by the DPW and shared by Perry showed the condition of her family's property earlier this month and that they showed the remnants of their garden following the winter months. She said the photos did not represent what the property looks like in spring and summer when it is in full bloom. She said her family intended, once the weather started to improve, to begin working on the yard and replanting their garden. 'We take care of our yard every year. This is something we do every year. It was like spring mode for us. We were in the process of cleaning up,' she said. Burger said she took strong exception to Perry's questioning the safety of her children, including her teenage son who has autism while referencing the city's need to remove the danger that the refrigerator posed. 'The lady in the article was quoted as saying it was something that made her autistic son happy,' Perry wrote. 'I was told by a couple of the city workers that there was a refrigerator in her backyard with the door still attached. Now if I had a child and was concerned about his welfare, autistic or not, isn't that something to be concerned about?' Previous stories published by the Gazette about the issue generated hundreds of comments on the newspaper's Facebook page, with the majority of them supporting the couple while criticizing city officials for cleaning their property and fining them when there are many other neglected and unsightly properties, both personal and commercial, across the Falls. The family started a GoFundMe page to raise money to cover the cost of the fine. As of Tuesday, it had raised $650. 'We're overjoyed. It's definitely a blessing,' Burger said of the community's support. Multiple media outlets reported that Mayor Robert Restaino is expected to release a statement and a timeline of the city's response to the property on Wednesday.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Gazette weighing legal options after Wydysh denies FOIL appeal
The Niagara Gazette and the Lockport Union-Sun & Journal are weighing their legal options in light of Niagara County's continued insistence that the news outlets pay costs associated with scanning, redacting and copying public employee timesheets requested in electronic form as part of a Freedom of Information Law request filed in February. In a letter dated April 10, Niagara County Legislature Chair Rebecca Wydysh, R-Lewiston, denied the newspapers' appeal of the county's FOIL request response dated March 14. In the county's response, human resources director Peter Lopes identified 1,129 pages as 'potentially responsive' to the newspapers' request for timesheets submitted by attorneys working for the public defender's office between Jan. 1, 2023 and Feb. 10, 2025. In his letter, Lopes indicated that the county could make the documents available at a cost of $356.83. Lopes also proposed a less expensive option, estimated at $282.25, that would allow a reporter to conduct an in-person inspection of physical copies of redacted timesheets. The second option included a requirement that the reporter be accompanied by an assigned county employee, at the newspapers' cost, during the in-person inspection. 'An employee will sit with you while you inspect the records,' Lopes wrote. 'If time exceeds 120 minutes, you will be charged for that employee's time at their hourly rate.' In an appeal sent to Wydysh on behalf of the newspapers, attorney Michael Higgins from the law firm Ernstrom & Dreste in Rochester argued that the county has no legal right under state law to charge by the page for copies of documents requested in electronic form. He also suggested the county's 'purported inability to scan documents without making physical copies' stretched 'the bounds of credulity.' Higgins' appeal also asserted that the county's attempt to charge fees for administrative time to prepare photocopies of records is prohibited under state law and that it is 'improper' to charge the newspapers to allow a reporter to inspect records and to have those records redacted. 'Niagara County's attempts to charge for prohibited items and to unnecessarily copy documents to induce a charge is a transparent attempt to frustrate (the newspapers') FOIL request and avoid its obligations under the Freedom of Information Law,' Higgins wrote. In her response, Wydysh restated the county's position that it is necessary to make physical copies of the requested documents so they can be redacted and scanned because some of the attorney timesheets 'may reflect medical or sick leave that is protected under HIPAA and exempt from FOIL disclosure.' In addition, Wydysh argued, as Lopes did before her, that based on the volume of records, the human resources department would have to attach each pay period to a separate email, which would require staff time that the county would need to be reimbursed by the newspapers. 'Public Officer's Law requires an agency to send records electronically so long as the effort to effectuate that does not exceed the effort necessary for an alternative method of responding,' Wydysh wrote. 'Because of the necessity of reviewing the timesheets for compliance with HIPAA, and redacting portions of records that contain protected information, before scanning, it would be more labor intensive to scan the timesheets. In that circumstance, an agency is not required to provide the records electronically.' Wydysh, citing a section of New York's Public Officer's Law, argues that the county is permitted to charge a fee based on the cost of the storage medium used, as well as the hourly salary of the lowest paid employee who has the skill needed to fulfill the request. Wydysh noted that the county advised the newspapers that the rate in this case would be $40.17 per hour. As to the in-person inspection option, Wydysh indicates that the county would make available copies of the timesheets at a cost of 25 cents per page but would not allow a reporter to take pictures of the records. She also noted that it is the county's position that a staff member would need to sit in on the records inspection and that the newspapers would be charged 'any time over two hours.' 'The human resources department was still willing to satisfy your client's preference to receive records electronically, but your client would be charged for the time associated with copying, reviewing, redacting, scanning in the records and attaching,' Wydysh wrote in her letter denying the newspapers' appeal. The newspapers can file an Article 78 proceeding in court to challenge Wydysh's denial of their appeal to the county's initial FOIL response.
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Niagara County denies another newspaper info appeal
Niagara County is refusing to release a redacted copy of reports compiled, at taxpayer expense, by a private law firm hired to review the conduct of attorneys working for the public defender's office. In a letter dated April 15, county Legislature Chair Rebecca Wydysh, R-Lewiston, indicated that the county has denied the Niagara Gazette and Lockport Union-Sun & Journal's appeal of its denial of a Freedom of Information Law request that sought redacted copies of two reports compiled following an investigation of the public defender's office by Bond, Schoeneck & King of Buffalo. The newspapers sought, in a Freedom of Information Law request sent to the county in March, a copy of any work product produced by the law firm, which was paid $23,192 to oversee the roughly two-month probe that took place last November and December. The county denied the request, while acknowledging the law firm produced two reports — one 12 pages long and a second that included 14 pages. In its denial, the county argued both reports constitute an 'attorney work product' and are, therefore, protected from public release as they represent information disclosed under 'attorney-client privilege.' The newspapers appealed the county's decision, requesting another review and the release of both reports, allowing for information to be redacted in keeping with state law which bars the public release of certain types of information, including personal data such as Social Security numbers. The county hired Bond, Schoeneck and King to conduct what they described as an 'independent, third-party review' of operations and staff in response to a complaint filed by a female attorney working for the public defender's office. The complaint resulted in the office's top two attorneys — chief public defender Nicholas Robinson and his first deputy Vince Sandonato — being placed on paid administrative leave amid the law firm's investigation. The law firm's findings were shared privately in executive session with members of the county legislature during a meeting on Jan. 21. During that meeting, county lawmakers accepted the law firm's recommendations to remove Robinson and Sandonato from their positions. The legislature also agreed during the meeting to accept Robinson's resignation, effective Feb. 3, and to hire veteran Erie County private defense attorney Herb Greenman as his replacement. Robinson did resign and left the public defender's office. Sandonato is no longer in his position as first deputy public defender but was hired by the county to work as a Medicaid fraud specialist in February. In denying the newspapers' appeal, Wydysh described both reports as being 'submitted to the firm's client after research and analysis on an issue the firm was specifically hired to examine and advise on.' 'The reports are the culmination of reflection and thought process of members of a firm that utilized their professional skill to render opinions based upon legal analysis of an issue,' Wydysh wrote. 'That legal analysis and opinion was discussed to its client in a confidential manner for the purpose of rending legal advice. Based upon the foregoing, your appeal is denied.' Wydysh's denial letter did not address the newspapers' contention that, by law, the county has a minimum obligation to release copies of both reports with allowable redactions. The county's latest denial of a FOIL request appeal from the newspapers follows an earlier decision on a different matter in which Wydysh maintained, against the newspapers' objections, that the county can require payment for costs associated with scanning, redacting and copying timesheets filed by attorneys working for the public defender. The newspapers filed their initial FOIL request in February, seeking copies of timesheets filed by county public defenders between Jan. 1, 2023 and Feb. 10, 2025. The county has offered to make copies of the timesheets available at a cost of $356.83, or to allow a reporter to conduct an in-person inspection of physical copies of redacted timesheets. Due to a county requirement that the reporter would need to be accompanied by an assigned county employee at the time of inspection, the estimated cost of that option is $282.25. Micheal Higgins, an attorney who filed the appeal on behalf of the newspapers in the timesheet case, argued that the county has no legal right to charge for the reproduction of public documents requested in electronic form under the state's Freedom of Information Law. In both FOIL request denials, the newspapers have the right to file article 78 proceedings in court in an effort to challenge the county's decisions. The newspapers are weighing their legal options.
