Shown here are interior photos of properties owned (and rented to college students) by Victor Salcedo, who was arrested because he missed a court date to answer charges of chipped paint.
Or as I like to call it, "What in the bloody name of Touchdown Jesus is going on with the city's Code Enforcement Department?"
Spoiler: This story culminates with Victor Salcedo being handcuffed at his home, taken to the city lock-up, where he was put behind bars.
Granted, this entry is a long one, but then again, Salcedo's journey is, too.
Full disclosure
1. I consider Salcedo to be a friend.
2. Salcedo and I argue weekly about politics, social issues and his affinity for mini vans (although the upgrade to the shiny, newer one is a vast improvement over the old, piss-yeller transport my children still refer to as The Magic School Bus).
3. I have coached (and during said practices, yelled at) his children in basketball.
4. And years ago, while I worked for Mayor Rich Bucci, and Salcedo was the chairman of the local Independence Party, I strongly advised Bucci, a Republican, to politely decline Salcedo's offer to endorse Bucci in a re-election campaign. Over some Red Cat in my dining room, I have since come clean to Salcedo about that.
5. I consider Salcedo one of the brightest bulbs in the pack. He is also an eccentric. My wife says she understands why he and I get along.
I also have been inside one of Salcedo's rental properties, as has my wife. We agreed we'd love to live there. It's meticulously cared for, and immaculately updated throughout.
Now, at the same time, I've also chided Salcedo for falling behind on mowing his lawn(s) while he battles the city's code meanies (OK, singular, not plural), and there have been moments when we've clashed over his tack in "fighting back."
But by-and-large, the man has great points, and he certainly has made major investments in the city, to the clear betterment of whatever neighborhood in which his properties sit.
What follows is one version of how things have unfolded in ... The Curious Case of Victor Salcedo.
Order to Comply
March 18, 2008
Issued by Chris Schleider, city code enforcement officer
Stated re-inspection date: On or before May 16, 2008 (3 p.m.)
In layman's terms, Salcedo was socked with some code violations at one of his properties, this one on Seminary Avenue.
Letter to Code
March 30, 2008
From Salcedo, to Dave Chadwick, director of code enforcement requesting a July 30, 2008 extension date.
Salcedo complies with most of the violations (April 9, 2008). According to Salcedo, a contractor completely reconstructs the side porch roof of the property in question, and installs new soffit and fascia where damaged. Meanwhile, Salcedo reports that another contractor helps prime and paint the new deck fascia and door trim(s).
Re-Order to Comply
May 8, 2008
Said Salcedo, "This was the last article of paperwork ever received from either Code Enforcement or City Court, or any other agency in City Hall regarding this alleged continuing violation."
From there, Salcedo notes that Chadwick grants an extension, to be performed on or before June 15, 2008 (3 p.m.)
Salcedo notes here that Schleider, the inspector for the case, chooses to completely ignore the new side porch roof and repairs, fluted moulding, plinths, decorative blocks, and new architectural metal house number plaque adorning both front doors at the Seminary property.
"He also ignored the aluminum fascia on the new front porch," Salcedo says. "There are absolutely no updates, observations or remarks recorded by Chris Schleider regarding work performed and completed at (the property) to date, which has brought the property to exterior compliance. I consider this a glaring failure on his part and, via this disconnect, a huge disservice to due process.
Yadda yadda yadda ... Salcedo alleges he is harassed via telephone by Schleider.
"Over the course of several days, I received very early morning phonecalls (7:45 a.m.), repeated voicemails, and hang-up calls from Chris Schleider demanding that copies of estimates and contracter contracts be faxed to him at his office," Salcedo says. "I told him I don’t have a fax machine. He demanded they be mailed then. I considered this a presumptious, invasive and absolute abuse of municipal authority.
"Strangely enough," Salcedo adds, "Schleider records making some of these phone calls in his reinspection reports."
Appearance Ticket
August 29, 2008
Issued by Chris Schleider on August 29, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. for a court appearance date, scheduled 1:30 p.m. September 18, 2008. Violation stated therein: “Failure to maintain structure.” Specific violations are "missing or invisible address numbers," "unstable, rotten side porch roof," "broken siding," "peeled and chipped paint."
Work in Progress
Salcedo reports that the following work was performed: painting, woodwork, aluminum wrapping of windows, as of September 15, 2008. The work is performed by a contractor, and Salcedo says he is able to produce a signed invoice and estimate sheet dated August 28, 2008.
Salcedo also says he completed more than half of the house’s windows on or about September 3, 2008. He says he has photos to prove this.
Accusatory Instrument
September 9, 2008
In this report is stated that Salcedo “... allowed paint on trim to be worn and chipped and siding to have breaks."
Meeting of the Minds
September 11, 2008
Salcedo says an impromptu meeting occurred between him and Schleider at the property in question.
"I very civilly expressed dissatisfaction as to how (he) had handled this entire bureaucratic episode thus far," says Salcedo. "Upon calling him the moment I see him across the street, and after I introduce myself to him for the first time, I remember saying, 'Do you not see all the work completed here? And that is still obviously ongoing? Did you notice the new roof? The new windows? Where’s the chipped paint on the 26 brand new windows? Do you not remember what this house used to look like?"
Court Appearance #1
September 18, 2008
"I was fully prepared to personally appear and document all the work already performed, my good-faith performance and conscientious ownership of (the property in question) over the years, before and after photographs, dated work orders, and argue the finer points of my chronological compliance and correspondence with City Hall," Salcedo says. He contrasted that approach to what he called Schleider's "obsession over chipped paint."
According to Salcedo, Brian Seachrist, the city's assistant corporation counsel, did not allow Salcedo to offer full input. Instead, says Salcedo, Seachrist argued on his behalf to Judge Seiden for another extension so that Salcedo could complete "everything" by November 13, 2008.
Additional Estimate
October 10, 2008
The estimate for the work to be done on the remaining windows is received from a contractor.
Court Appearance #2
November 13, 2008
According to Salcedo, the case was "tabled and adjourned by Brian Seachrist to May 8, 2009 to account for the terrible winter weather now and to come." Salcedo says he received nothing in writing through hand delivery or via mail. He showed for court, he says, wasting his time.
Court Appearance #3
May 8, 2009
Salcedo admits that he simply spaced this one. "I forgot about it," he said, adding that he did not receive any notice by mail, e-mail or telephone. "Nothing in writing was ever handed and/or mailed to me at any point, by either City Court, Code Enforcement, or any other agency in City Hall so as to notify and/or confirm for me this adjourned and rescheduled court date assigned to me six moths prior."
Amazed yet? Oh. Stick with me. It gets better, beginning ... right about now.
Bench Warrant: Victor Salcedo
May 8, 2009
A generalized, undated document. Signed by Judge Seiden. Go arrest Victor Salcedo. Book 'im, Dano. Toss him into a cell with a gang-banger nabbed the night before from over Court Street way.
So, Salcedo's worked along with the city's druthers to update a property once a heap of crap and now a desirable living location for discerning college students, and Seiden, assigned by the mayor to replaced the shamed Bob Murphy, puts out the dragnet.
Is this a reasonable application of municipal power and resources in the handling of a missed, re-scheduled court date regarding “chipped paint” that was never served? Hell, even the two police officers probably felt stupid following through on this one.
After Salcedo was processed, he was asked by a police officer if he was suicidal. He said he laughed. Soon thereafter he appeared in front of a different city court judge, Bill Pelella, who, according to Salcedo, was surprised about the turn of events. He sent Salcedo home and rescheduled him for his code court date. According to Salcedo, Pelella said essentially this: "Wow. OK. This is Judge Seiden’s deal. I’m simply going to assign this a new court date for May 21st. Thank you, Mr. Salcedo.”
Oh, another thing ... the bench warrant was mailed to Salcedo May 14, 2009. He was arrested at his home at 9:07 a.m. May 15, 2009.
The mailed bench warrant? That arrived in the mail ... around 3:15 p.m. May 15, 2009 (6 hours after he was arrested).
Apparently, there were no other warrants available in the stack this fine day. I, for one, feel better knowing a louse like Salcedo was ... OK, I can't even joke about it.
So, Salcedo was treated as a flight risk. Then he gets another court date from Pelella (who, of course, is an innocent bit player in this comedy).
Salcedo, like a lot of people would have been, was outraged. As an outspoken critic of the current mayor and his minions, few would consider him paranoid to say he was targeted. Count me in that camp.
After all, several former employees at City Hall, with whom I worked while employed there from 1996 through the end of 2003, have shared with me a sentiment that covers all their commentaries about working under the current "leadership." Best summed up as: "You wouldn't even believe it ..."
So Salcedo contacts the media, and within its small window, Channel 34 does a story. To be fair, this isn't the type of story a TV newscast can tell well in 60 to 90 seconds, which is a long, long story by TV news standards. Meanwhile, the local newspaper is willing to listen, but the Press & Sun-Bulletin, for a reason not known to me, shies away from a lot of "political" stories these days.
Something I found interesting in the development of the Channel 34 story, though, was an e-mail sent to the station's reporter, Jan Carabeo, from Andrew Block, the mayor's community relations director.
Note that the following e-mail is verbatim (I took out the exact address of Salcedo's property, though), including incorrect spelling and court date errors. It was sent on May 15, 2009. (I broke up the paragraphs to make it easier to read.)
From: Block, Andrew
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 2:38 PM
To: CARABEO, JAN
Subject: comment from City
Hello, Jan,
I just called your phone, but only got your machine. Please see my email below.
I was informed by Corp. Counsel that you were seeking the City’s comment on a story concerning Victor Salacedo. Please see the below for background on this matter. Please also consider it our comment on the matter.
“Victor Salacedo was cited for code violations at (his property) for failure to maintain the exterior structure, which is in violation of the New York State Property Maintenance Code and our local ordinance. He was given a notice of violation on March 18, 2008. He was given until May 16, 2008 to complete the work.
He was granted several extensions and the work was never completed. He first appeared in court on September 18, 2008. He pled not guilty to the violation and was granted an extension until October 30, 2008. On October 30, 2008 he appeared again in court and the work was not complete.
He was given another extension to November 13, 2008; the work was still not completed but considering the inclement weather in November, the matter was again put off until May 7, 2009.
Mr. Salcedo failed to do any more work on the property and also failed to appear in court on May 7, 2009 as directed. A bench warrant was issued by City Court for his failure to appear on May 7, 2009. It is our policy to enforce City laws fairly and equitably, and we will to do so."
Best,
Andrew Block
Director of Community Relations, Office of the Mayor
38 Hawley Street - Fourth Floor, City Hall
Binghamton, NY 13901
Office: (607) 772-7001
Mobile: (607) 343-3670
Fax: (607) 772-7079
awblock@cityofbinghamton.com
Seems incorrect to have stated, on the record to a media outlet, that Salcedo "failed to do any more work on the property ..." Fairly judgmental on Block's part. Ironic.
According to Salcedo, "The aluminum wrap for the remaining windows was pre-cut and pre-bent inside the garage of (my property) during the cold, winter months. How in the world would Block know what I was doing during the winter months? Did he bother to ask? No."
For the enter lay of the land, as it were, let's take a look at all the work performed by Salcedo, or by contractors on his behalf, at his Seminary Avenue property:
* New boilers, 2 of them 2004 WINTER
* Updated plumbing 2004 WINTER
* New electric service 2004 WINTER
* New vinyl windows, 25 of them 2004 WINTER
* New front doors, 2 of them 2004 WINTER
* Completely renovated interior & esthetics 2004 WINTER/SPRING
i.e.: ornamental woodwork, period ceilings, updated wiring, overhead lighting, wired smoke detectors, plastering and sheetrock, refinished wood floors, updated kitchen cabinetry, ornamental scrollwork, painting.
* Siding and flashing repairs 2004/2005
* New garage doors, two of them 2005 SPRING
* New driveway 2005 SPRING
* New driveway apron 2005 SPRING
* Updated gas service and main move 2005 SPRING
* New wrap-around porch 2005 SUMMER/FALL
* New landscaping, PHASE 1 2005
* Masonry work/stone wall, PHASE 1 2005
* New garage roof 2006
* New fencing 2007
* New main roof 2007
* New side porch roof 2008 SUMMER
* New soffit and fascia repairs 2007/2008
* New landscaping, PHASE 2 2008 FALL
* Fencing ADDITIONS 2008
* Fluted exterior door moulding 2008 SUMMER
* Aluminum window trim 2008 SUMMER/FALL
* Decorative porch elements 2008 FALL/2009 SPRING
* Masonry work/stone wall, PHASE 2 2008 FALL/2009 SPRING
Salcedo says the exterior and surrounding landscape at his Seminary Avenue property are still works in progress, but he adds that his progress has been consistently impeded by gyrations from City Hall.
"The history and clear intent of my continued renovation activity at the Seminary Avenue property matters just as much as how a bench warrant for my arrest is handled by the Warrant Division of the Binghamton Police Department," Salcedo claims.
"Civil liberties and due process do not take a second seat to housing court business, good faith correspondence, and attempted penalty extractions by a mayor or a code enforcement officer with, respectively, a clearly selective, discriminatory, and illegal spot-assessment track record and a clearly-voiced hatred for student housing providers on the West Side."
There's more, of course. But perhaps for another day.
Meanwhile, in this curious case, unfortunately for Salcedo, these types of events have gotten old. After all, he's not getting any younger.
Spoiler: This story culminates with Victor Salcedo being handcuffed at his home, taken to the city lock-up, where he was put behind bars.
Granted, this entry is a long one, but then again, Salcedo's journey is, too.
Full disclosure
1. I consider Salcedo to be a friend.
2. Salcedo and I argue weekly about politics, social issues and his affinity for mini vans (although the upgrade to the shiny, newer one is a vast improvement over the old, piss-yeller transport my children still refer to as The Magic School Bus).
3. I have coached (and during said practices, yelled at) his children in basketball.
4. And years ago, while I worked for Mayor Rich Bucci, and Salcedo was the chairman of the local Independence Party, I strongly advised Bucci, a Republican, to politely decline Salcedo's offer to endorse Bucci in a re-election campaign. Over some Red Cat in my dining room, I have since come clean to Salcedo about that.
5. I consider Salcedo one of the brightest bulbs in the pack. He is also an eccentric. My wife says she understands why he and I get along.
I also have been inside one of Salcedo's rental properties, as has my wife. We agreed we'd love to live there. It's meticulously cared for, and immaculately updated throughout.
Now, at the same time, I've also chided Salcedo for falling behind on mowing his lawn(s) while he battles the city's code meanies (OK, singular, not plural), and there have been moments when we've clashed over his tack in "fighting back."
But by-and-large, the man has great points, and he certainly has made major investments in the city, to the clear betterment of whatever neighborhood in which his properties sit.
What follows is one version of how things have unfolded in ... The Curious Case of Victor Salcedo.
Order to Comply
March 18, 2008
Issued by Chris Schleider, city code enforcement officer
Stated re-inspection date: On or before May 16, 2008 (3 p.m.)
In layman's terms, Salcedo was socked with some code violations at one of his properties, this one on Seminary Avenue.
Letter to Code
March 30, 2008
From Salcedo, to Dave Chadwick, director of code enforcement requesting a July 30, 2008 extension date.
Salcedo complies with most of the violations (April 9, 2008). According to Salcedo, a contractor completely reconstructs the side porch roof of the property in question, and installs new soffit and fascia where damaged. Meanwhile, Salcedo reports that another contractor helps prime and paint the new deck fascia and door trim(s).
Re-Order to Comply
May 8, 2008
Said Salcedo, "This was the last article of paperwork ever received from either Code Enforcement or City Court, or any other agency in City Hall regarding this alleged continuing violation."
From there, Salcedo notes that Chadwick grants an extension, to be performed on or before June 15, 2008 (3 p.m.)
Salcedo notes here that Schleider, the inspector for the case, chooses to completely ignore the new side porch roof and repairs, fluted moulding, plinths, decorative blocks, and new architectural metal house number plaque adorning both front doors at the Seminary property.
"He also ignored the aluminum fascia on the new front porch," Salcedo says. "There are absolutely no updates, observations or remarks recorded by Chris Schleider regarding work performed and completed at (the property) to date, which has brought the property to exterior compliance. I consider this a glaring failure on his part and, via this disconnect, a huge disservice to due process.
Yadda yadda yadda ... Salcedo alleges he is harassed via telephone by Schleider.
"Over the course of several days, I received very early morning phonecalls (7:45 a.m.), repeated voicemails, and hang-up calls from Chris Schleider demanding that copies of estimates and contracter contracts be faxed to him at his office," Salcedo says. "I told him I don’t have a fax machine. He demanded they be mailed then. I considered this a presumptious, invasive and absolute abuse of municipal authority.
"Strangely enough," Salcedo adds, "Schleider records making some of these phone calls in his reinspection reports."
Appearance Ticket
August 29, 2008
Issued by Chris Schleider on August 29, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. for a court appearance date, scheduled 1:30 p.m. September 18, 2008. Violation stated therein: “Failure to maintain structure.” Specific violations are "missing or invisible address numbers," "unstable, rotten side porch roof," "broken siding," "peeled and chipped paint."
Work in Progress
Salcedo reports that the following work was performed: painting, woodwork, aluminum wrapping of windows, as of September 15, 2008. The work is performed by a contractor, and Salcedo says he is able to produce a signed invoice and estimate sheet dated August 28, 2008.
Salcedo also says he completed more than half of the house’s windows on or about September 3, 2008. He says he has photos to prove this.
Accusatory Instrument
September 9, 2008
In this report is stated that Salcedo “... allowed paint on trim to be worn and chipped and siding to have breaks."
Meeting of the Minds
September 11, 2008
Salcedo says an impromptu meeting occurred between him and Schleider at the property in question.
"I very civilly expressed dissatisfaction as to how (he) had handled this entire bureaucratic episode thus far," says Salcedo. "Upon calling him the moment I see him across the street, and after I introduce myself to him for the first time, I remember saying, 'Do you not see all the work completed here? And that is still obviously ongoing? Did you notice the new roof? The new windows? Where’s the chipped paint on the 26 brand new windows? Do you not remember what this house used to look like?"
Court Appearance #1
September 18, 2008
"I was fully prepared to personally appear and document all the work already performed, my good-faith performance and conscientious ownership of (the property in question) over the years, before and after photographs, dated work orders, and argue the finer points of my chronological compliance and correspondence with City Hall," Salcedo says. He contrasted that approach to what he called Schleider's "obsession over chipped paint."
According to Salcedo, Brian Seachrist, the city's assistant corporation counsel, did not allow Salcedo to offer full input. Instead, says Salcedo, Seachrist argued on his behalf to Judge Seiden for another extension so that Salcedo could complete "everything" by November 13, 2008.
Additional Estimate
October 10, 2008
The estimate for the work to be done on the remaining windows is received from a contractor.
Court Appearance #2
November 13, 2008
According to Salcedo, the case was "tabled and adjourned by Brian Seachrist to May 8, 2009 to account for the terrible winter weather now and to come." Salcedo says he received nothing in writing through hand delivery or via mail. He showed for court, he says, wasting his time.
Court Appearance #3
May 8, 2009
Salcedo admits that he simply spaced this one. "I forgot about it," he said, adding that he did not receive any notice by mail, e-mail or telephone. "Nothing in writing was ever handed and/or mailed to me at any point, by either City Court, Code Enforcement, or any other agency in City Hall so as to notify and/or confirm for me this adjourned and rescheduled court date assigned to me six moths prior."
Amazed yet? Oh. Stick with me. It gets better, beginning ... right about now.
Bench Warrant: Victor Salcedo
May 8, 2009
A generalized, undated document. Signed by Judge Seiden. Go arrest Victor Salcedo. Book 'im, Dano. Toss him into a cell with a gang-banger nabbed the night before from over Court Street way.
So, Salcedo's worked along with the city's druthers to update a property once a heap of crap and now a desirable living location for discerning college students, and Seiden, assigned by the mayor to replaced the shamed Bob Murphy, puts out the dragnet.
Is this a reasonable application of municipal power and resources in the handling of a missed, re-scheduled court date regarding “chipped paint” that was never served? Hell, even the two police officers probably felt stupid following through on this one.
After Salcedo was processed, he was asked by a police officer if he was suicidal. He said he laughed. Soon thereafter he appeared in front of a different city court judge, Bill Pelella, who, according to Salcedo, was surprised about the turn of events. He sent Salcedo home and rescheduled him for his code court date. According to Salcedo, Pelella said essentially this: "Wow. OK. This is Judge Seiden’s deal. I’m simply going to assign this a new court date for May 21st. Thank you, Mr. Salcedo.”
Oh, another thing ... the bench warrant was mailed to Salcedo May 14, 2009. He was arrested at his home at 9:07 a.m. May 15, 2009.
The mailed bench warrant? That arrived in the mail ... around 3:15 p.m. May 15, 2009 (6 hours after he was arrested).
Apparently, there were no other warrants available in the stack this fine day. I, for one, feel better knowing a louse like Salcedo was ... OK, I can't even joke about it.
So, Salcedo was treated as a flight risk. Then he gets another court date from Pelella (who, of course, is an innocent bit player in this comedy).
Salcedo, like a lot of people would have been, was outraged. As an outspoken critic of the current mayor and his minions, few would consider him paranoid to say he was targeted. Count me in that camp.
After all, several former employees at City Hall, with whom I worked while employed there from 1996 through the end of 2003, have shared with me a sentiment that covers all their commentaries about working under the current "leadership." Best summed up as: "You wouldn't even believe it ..."
So Salcedo contacts the media, and within its small window, Channel 34 does a story. To be fair, this isn't the type of story a TV newscast can tell well in 60 to 90 seconds, which is a long, long story by TV news standards. Meanwhile, the local newspaper is willing to listen, but the Press & Sun-Bulletin, for a reason not known to me, shies away from a lot of "political" stories these days.
Something I found interesting in the development of the Channel 34 story, though, was an e-mail sent to the station's reporter, Jan Carabeo, from Andrew Block, the mayor's community relations director.
Note that the following e-mail is verbatim (I took out the exact address of Salcedo's property, though), including incorrect spelling and court date errors. It was sent on May 15, 2009. (I broke up the paragraphs to make it easier to read.)
From: Block, Andrew
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 2:38 PM
To: CARABEO, JAN
Subject: comment from City
Hello, Jan,
I just called your phone, but only got your machine. Please see my email below.
I was informed by Corp. Counsel that you were seeking the City’s comment on a story concerning Victor Salacedo. Please see the below for background on this matter. Please also consider it our comment on the matter.
“Victor Salacedo was cited for code violations at (his property) for failure to maintain the exterior structure, which is in violation of the New York State Property Maintenance Code and our local ordinance. He was given a notice of violation on March 18, 2008. He was given until May 16, 2008 to complete the work.
He was granted several extensions and the work was never completed. He first appeared in court on September 18, 2008. He pled not guilty to the violation and was granted an extension until October 30, 2008. On October 30, 2008 he appeared again in court and the work was not complete.
He was given another extension to November 13, 2008; the work was still not completed but considering the inclement weather in November, the matter was again put off until May 7, 2009.
Mr. Salcedo failed to do any more work on the property and also failed to appear in court on May 7, 2009 as directed. A bench warrant was issued by City Court for his failure to appear on May 7, 2009. It is our policy to enforce City laws fairly and equitably, and we will to do so."
Best,
Andrew Block
Director of Community Relations, Office of the Mayor
38 Hawley Street - Fourth Floor, City Hall
Binghamton, NY 13901
Office: (607) 772-7001
Mobile: (607) 343-3670
Fax: (607) 772-7079
awblock@cityofbinghamton.com
Seems incorrect to have stated, on the record to a media outlet, that Salcedo "failed to do any more work on the property ..." Fairly judgmental on Block's part. Ironic.
According to Salcedo, "The aluminum wrap for the remaining windows was pre-cut and pre-bent inside the garage of (my property) during the cold, winter months. How in the world would Block know what I was doing during the winter months? Did he bother to ask? No."
For the enter lay of the land, as it were, let's take a look at all the work performed by Salcedo, or by contractors on his behalf, at his Seminary Avenue property:
* New boilers, 2 of them 2004 WINTER
* Updated plumbing 2004 WINTER
* New electric service 2004 WINTER
* New vinyl windows, 25 of them 2004 WINTER
* New front doors, 2 of them 2004 WINTER
* Completely renovated interior & esthetics 2004 WINTER/SPRING
i.e.: ornamental woodwork, period ceilings, updated wiring, overhead lighting, wired smoke detectors, plastering and sheetrock, refinished wood floors, updated kitchen cabinetry, ornamental scrollwork, painting.
* Siding and flashing repairs 2004/2005
* New garage doors, two of them 2005 SPRING
* New driveway 2005 SPRING
* New driveway apron 2005 SPRING
* Updated gas service and main move 2005 SPRING
* New wrap-around porch 2005 SUMMER/FALL
* New landscaping, PHASE 1 2005
* Masonry work/stone wall, PHASE 1 2005
* New garage roof 2006
* New fencing 2007
* New main roof 2007
* New side porch roof 2008 SUMMER
* New soffit and fascia repairs 2007/2008
* New landscaping, PHASE 2 2008 FALL
* Fencing ADDITIONS 2008
* Fluted exterior door moulding 2008 SUMMER
* Aluminum window trim 2008 SUMMER/FALL
* Decorative porch elements 2008 FALL/2009 SPRING
* Masonry work/stone wall, PHASE 2 2008 FALL/2009 SPRING
Salcedo says the exterior and surrounding landscape at his Seminary Avenue property are still works in progress, but he adds that his progress has been consistently impeded by gyrations from City Hall.
"The history and clear intent of my continued renovation activity at the Seminary Avenue property matters just as much as how a bench warrant for my arrest is handled by the Warrant Division of the Binghamton Police Department," Salcedo claims.
"Civil liberties and due process do not take a second seat to housing court business, good faith correspondence, and attempted penalty extractions by a mayor or a code enforcement officer with, respectively, a clearly selective, discriminatory, and illegal spot-assessment track record and a clearly-voiced hatred for student housing providers on the West Side."
There's more, of course. But perhaps for another day.
Meanwhile, in this curious case, unfortunately for Salcedo, these types of events have gotten old. After all, he's not getting any younger.
And now ... something completely different.
Stephen, there is one factual mistake in your "The Curious Case of Victor Salcedo.": It was Warrant Control Officer Sgt Larry Hendrickson who signed the undated warrant for Victor Salcedo's arrest, NOT Judge Seiden.
ReplyDeleteHi Garo, thanks for the comment. The judge signed the warrant for Victor's arrest, then it filtered to the warrant division. From there, Hendrickson was to send a letter on to Victor, on which may have been his signature.
ReplyDelete-SPJ