City giving away land?

I caught a report by Mark Hebert Tuesday on WHAS11, http://www.whas11.com/video/political-index.html?nvid=271788&shu=1 , concerning the City's plan to give the alley known as Reed Alley, (or for most familiar with this alley it is known as "piss" alley), to the owners abutting it. Rick Redding also carried a quickie on this here: Time to Learn Something

Funnily enough the business owners apparently do not want the "free" property.

Why you may ask? Simple.

The City owned property has not been taken care of by the City and is obviously violating just about any code with Code enforcement you can think of.

The alley even comes complete with it's own sinkhole that has not been filled in. Never mind the severe safety hazards for anyone going through there or the liability Abramson has let us be stuck with if anyone does get hurt.

Welcome to Abramson's version of Louisville Metro government. One in which no buck cannot be passed! When it is broke make somebody else fix what he didn't.

While Code enforcement continues to harass homeowners and small business they conveniently let the City off the hook and ignore the problems it has with property ownership.

Pot meet kettle.

As is typical with the Abramson administration the City does anything it wants to in order to avoid accountability at the expense of we the people.

By "giving" the alley to the adjoining businesses this in effect takes Abramson off the hook for repairing the alleyway and puts the OBLIGATION OF RESPONSIBILITY on the small business owners. When they do not fix this area by Abramson's timetable they will then be fined heavily for failure to comply. You know the drill by now.

In this particular case I decided to research further to see if this was even legal and uncovered a few details along the way.

For example, according to KRS382.135:

382.135 Statement of consideration or market value and mailing and in-care-of addresses required in deed to real property -- Exceptions -- Clerk prohibited from filing noncompliant deed. - http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/382-00/135.PDF

(1) In addition to any other requirement imposed by law, a deed to real property shall contain the following:

(a) The mailing addresses of the grantor and grantee;
(b) A statement of the full consideration;
(c) A statement indicating the in-care-of address to which the property tax bill for the year in which the property is transferred may be sent; and
(d) 1. In the case of a transfer other than by gift, or with nominal or no consideration a sworn, notarized certificate signed by the grantor or his agent and the grantee or his agent, or the parent or guardian of a person under eighteen (18) years old, that the consideration reflected in the deed is the full consideration paid for the property; or

2. In the case of a transfer either by gift or with nominal or no consideration, a sworn, notarized certificate signed by the grantor or his agent and the grantee or his agent, or the parent or guardian of a person under eighteen (18) years old, stating that the transfer is by gift and setting forth the estimated fair cash value of the property.

(2) The deed filing requirements listed in subsection (1)(b) and (d)* of this section shall not apply to:

(c) Deeds which convey rights-of-way that involve governmental agencies;

Prior to August 1, according to law, NO ONE could transfer property to anyone without both agreeing to it and getting signed notarized documents as such. I mean really, why then could I not just deed over a certain piece of property to anyone if it was decrepit and was going to cost a bundle to fix.

Well, interestingly enough the law has now been "tweaked" a bit and the new changes went into effect guess when?

August 1, 2008. Less than 2 weeks ago. Interesting to say the least huh?

According to (2) above, that went into effect August 1, 2008, we can conclude one thing.

Yes indeed Abramson, on behalf of the City of course, can do this huge favor and dump the interest to the alley onto the adjacent owners, or anyone else he sees fit too really, and voila!

Like it or not Abramson is off the hook again!

Mere coincidence that the effective date was less than 2 weeks ago? You be the judge.

Instead of taking responsibility for this situation, and rehabbing the alleyway he is responsible for, Abramson has once again found a way to force his problems onto someone else.

Just one more way he will stick it to someone to get money in the future through fines and harassment for his mess. A mess he didn't take care of when he was obligated to.

Is this legal or ethical? There are lots of questions to be asked.

Once again selective enforcement by Code enforcement. Kind of makes you wonder where diligent hard working inspectors such as John Flood or Michael Baugh are doesn't it?

Time to say enough is enough.