Saturday was a good canvassing day. By sharing my own experiences with undecided voters or Moore voters, I was able to write
‘GO GORDON' on my sheet next to several names.
One gentleman had voted for Ginderske and was planning to vote for Moore. Luckily he was open minded and listened. He changed from Moore to undecided. I decided it was time to go out on a limb and tell our condo story. At the end of a quick re-cap of the saga of our building, he said,
‘I’m definitely voting for Don now.’Here, then, for other undecideds, is my story told with the permission and agreement of the owners involved in the dilemma.
In 2002, two months after moving into my first ever property purchase, my downstairs neighbor was mugged coming home late one night. He contacted the police and rode with them looking for the muggers to no avail. He warned me about being out late at night. I had already surmised as much on my walk home from work at 6pm. We are both in our 50s which means curfew shouldn’t apply. After reporting the incident to the police, he also called the ward office but never got a call back. I called and never got a call back either. Finally, I asked if the alderman had an email address, and sent him an email. He finally responded at 2AM a few days later. Some months later, a neighbor on Jarvis complained to the Alderman’s office about crime and received almost the same email response from the alderman who outlined his achievements in getting rid of slumlords and reducing crime, blah blah blah. Apparently he has a ‘form mugging email’ he sends to constituents who complain.
Fast forward to November 2003: I received a voicemail message from a city attorney. Imagine my surprise when I called the next day and learned that a collection attorney for the city was contacting me to collect. The city claimed that I had purchased this building and owed the city a few thousand for not appearing at a building hearing in June of 2003. He had no knowledge that the building was a condo and there were three owners here.
He said that he managed to get my home phone number but “couldn’t recall how.” My neighbor and I spent hours digging up information on this building to prove to then commissioner of buildings, Norma Reyes, that we didn’t develop it, had no blueprints, and had no involvement in it. Reluctantly the city vacated the order (it’s very difficult for the city to admit any errors). All the information my neighbor and I dug up was right in City Hall where they all worked. But instead of them doing their work, for which they are paid, in a building they presumably go to every day, we had to do the research for them to prove we had no involvement in the development. Of course, no one had showed for the hearing because the city sent the summons to a closed trust at Chicago Title and Trust. Instead of going after the developer – one Marek Galen, cited for numerous housing violations, the city just let it sit for awhile – until they decided to come after me.
Our building was once a drug and gang house and after enough neighbors complained, the city sent the drug and gang task force inspectors to write up everything including hang nails, to put pressure on the slumlord owner in the late 1990’s.
After the 2003 episode we obtained copies of all the write-ups from that department. The inspectors were in and out of this building all the time while the slumlord was in and out of court from around 1999 to 2001. But the rehab from rentals to condos continued.
In June 2006, my neighbor received a letter from the department of buildings. He thought it was a reprint mailing from the 2003 city correspondence and filed it. His first mistake. He was also in the midst of planning his youngest daughter’s wedding. Second mistake -- family life comes after government. I noticed the letter when we made copies of the condo association by-laws where he had clipped it.
We contacted the building department and after the runaround we were given a real person to talk to. According to the story given us, someone had made an anonymous complaint about the ‘state of our building’ and that it was
‘severe enough’ for the department to send inspectors. City inspectors descended on our building and we were written up from head to toe: we have to spot tuck-point, add a railing to downstairs steps leading into the basement, repair/replace the chimney, replace the front gate lock that had been there during all the investigations by the city while Marek Galan continued with the rehab and appeared in court for code violations, and for peeling paint. The verbiage was vague and when I asked her about ‘peeling paint’ on the windowsills the building department had no clear answer. The outside is brick and concrete. The inside sills are new. There was also a ‘violation’ for having a padlock on the back gate. So neighbors, get those padlocks off your back gates so the criminals can get in easier.
We were also informed that we need to repair the front step which is concrete. Our damaged concrete step is on the hinged side of the gate. But it’s warmer now and we can repair it but will the city find fault with ‘do it yourself’ worksmanship in their mandatory compliance program? Also noted in the inspection is a management ID statute that requires us to post a sign stating who manages the building and a phone number.
My lawyer says self-managed, small condo buildings don’t need this sign, but the city claims we do. Our porch system, which was grandfathered and perfectly legal until the Lincoln Park incident, was also deemed in violation and cited for repair. The inspection report also stated that we had to remove an accumulation of debris/garbage behind the garages. There has never been an accumulation of anything by these garages (Mr. Clean lives here and rakes and cleans all the time) so we’re not sure what we’re supposed to remove, exactly. We did have a problem with the Greenview contractors parking behind our garages and blocking the doors, and had to get a Lincoln Towing sign put up to remedy that. The only debris we can think of is the free mulch the city delivered and dumped unceremoniously in the alley behind one garage.
The best part in the report is the statement that there was no entry into the building to verify the validity of claims. As in the 2003 incident, one gentleman from the buildings department admitted the inspectors aren’t good at ‘closing’ out code violations once they’ve been rectified.
Call date and time of 311 complaint: 6/8/06 Caller name: unknown.
Did I contact the alderman? Yes. He claimed to be aware of the ‘complaint,’ stating these come through his office. Well, did he check it out first? According to Kevin Cosgrove in a later email, the ward office does not warn property owners in advance if a complaint has been filed….
I reminded Joe that this building was in court for years and had been crawling with inspectors and then had gone condo. So what happened? He just tossed the ball into the court of the city attorney who handled the case, and of course, into the court of his chief of staff, Kevin Cosgrove.
So I called the city attorney who now works in another area of the city. I walked up and by FOIA got a copy of the court proceedings against owner/developer/slumlord Marek Galen. They had written this upstanding developer up for everything, ordered him to repair it, and re-written him again. The real kicker that angers all three of us condo owners NOW is that the city dropped the ball and let this upstanding developer off the hook with a
plea bargain from $50,000 to $10,000 and 7 days in jail. He was to divest himself of all interest in this building and also not to own any property in the City of Chicago unless it was a single family dwelling in which he resided. These wise ones who were so on top of things were totally unaware that concurrent with these court proceedings, Galan was rehabbing a building on Juneway into condos!
The Alderman’s office was aware of complaints against Galen, the city was aware, yet he was able to continue developing another building in Rogers Park!Another kicker the City of Chicago players don’t want to acknowledge or help us with is this one that we were unaware of until I got the court documents:
“(a) All proceeds from the sales will be kept in escrow held by attorney Mark Jaszczuk to pay contractors for further renovation of the unfinished portions of the building; (b) All fines due to the City of Chicago shall be paid from the escrow prior to any disbursement to the defendant; (c) No unit shall be occupied until the entire building is brought into compliance with the Building Code of Chicago and Certificates of Occupancy are issued; and (d)
Purchasers shall be informed of this Order prior to closing.”I faxed the legal documents on Galan to the attorney who closed for me. He stated that none of this was discovered in closing and : “If there was a judgment against your Seller prior to your closing, the title company may be liable if they failed to disclose a recorded judgment.” According to the City Attorney and Kevin Cosgrove, people often purchase buildings knowing there are violations so they can get them CHEAP. Cosgrove sent a long email to me more or less insinuating that I was a liar and that I bought the condo CHEAP and knew all the background. (I learned some of the history from neighbors months AFTER I bought!) He also stated that he tells prospective buyers to do their homework and call the Department of Buildings and call the ward office, and to get an inspector. Bottom line: according to the Alderman’s office, I’m stupid, so are my neighbors, and so are our attorneys and closing agents. Thanks, Joe and Kevin!
FACT:The City dropped the ball. The City started an issue and no one followed up on a known problem and personage of questionable character named Marek Galan. The City allowed a plea bargain from this upstanding citizen, collected $10k, and ordered the building to be brought up to code or else inform Purchasers prior to closing. No one – not Galen and not the city did either and so the City is now covering their backside and making three buyers villains instead of victims. When I asked the city side where the money in escrow was, the response was a rather flippant ‘you’ll have to file a civil suit.’
When I spoke to Cosgrove at the ward office and reminded him that the City dropped the ball, that three different closing attorneys could not find the code violations, his response was a weak ‘well, this is the law and I don’t know how or why no one found it.’ I responded that with such a long drawn-out problem, how could the ward office NOT know the place was rehabbed and sold as condo’s? He cited again how busy he is and he can’t know of every condo being sold in Rogers Park. Cosgrove is the appointed buildings person for Ward 49. He was aware of the plea bargain but not the fact that this building was condo'd? Here's the proof from the court document in a binder on the city attorney's shelf showing the courts "plea bargain" documents clearly state:
11. The parties agree all remaining building code violations must be cured and all the other items ordered by the administrative hearing officer must be complied with prior to May 1, 2001.
12. Defendant shall divest himself of all interest in the Subject Property, and units therein, located at xxxx Street prior to May 1, 2001
13. The court permits Defendant to
sell Unit number two (2) and unit number three (3) under the following conditions: “(a) All proceeds from the
sales will be kept in escrow held by attorney Mark Jaszczuk to pay contractors for further renovation of the unfinished portions of the building; (b) All fines due to the City of Chicago shall be paid from the escrow prior to any disbursement to the defendant; (c) No unit shall be occupied until the entire building is brought into compliance with the Building Code of Chicago and Certificates of Occupancy are issued; and (d) Purchasers shall be informed of this Order prior to closing.”
Well, if the outstanding violations had never been rectified and the swarm of inspectors never followed up after the city received their $10k, then how the hell are three dumb owners supposed to know what happened? Who’s accountable for making a mess and not cleaning it up anyway? The statute clearly states that either corporation counsel or the buildings department must post outstanding violations where they can be discovered.
13-14-190 Sanctions applicable to owner--Property.(a) The order to correct a code violation and any sanctions and/or costs imposed by the hearing officer as the result of a finding of a code violation shall attach to the property as well as to the owner of the property so that a finding of a code violation against one owner cannot be avoided by conveying or transferring the property to another owner. Any subsequent transferee or owner of property takes subject to the findings, decision and order of a hearing officer under this chapter if a notice consisting of a copy of the order to correct a code violation and imposing any sanctions and/or costs, and a description of the real estate affected sufficient for the identification thereof,
has been filed in the office of the recorder or the officer of the registrar of titles in Cook County by the building commissioner or the corporation counsel prior to the transfer or conveyance to the subsequent transferee or owner.Here’s a picture of Alderman Moore’s
front porch. Maybe the city inspectors should write up his front porch and recommend that he fix the ‘missing member’ and maybe a little scraping and painting is in order too?
