The citizens of Brunswick should feel insulted by the recent verdict against Orville Ranger, whose property at Maine and Mason streets was destroyed by fire on April 17, 2011.

This tragic fire not only destroyed a three-story, 174- year-old downtown building, but left 17 people homeless, resulted in a total loss to five small businesses and endangered our firefighters who battled the fire for over seven hours in a labyrinth of hallways and stairwells.

As reported in The Times Record on Nov. 25, Ranger pleaded guilty to a civil violation and paid a $500 fine. As part of a plea agreement, he was not convicted of a Class E criminal misdemeanor charge of violation of a public fire safety rule.

Yet, Ranger was criminally negligent because he repeatedly ignored public fire safety rules during many years of ownership; and, despite repeated requests by the state and town, Ranger did not address the code violations.

We should feel insulted by Ranger’s cavalier remark, reported in the April 18 issue of The Forecaster, stating “They make these codes and then they foist them on you as a building owner, and you’re supposed to abide by them no matter how difficult or expensive it may be.”

Unfortunately, this is the attitude of many owners of rental properties as well as owners of vacant or abandoned properties that are not maintained to ensure a standard of habitability and safety. Moreover, it emphasizes the necessity of strengthening our codes and ordinances to promote and protect the public health, safety and general welfare of all citizens and to provide a timely recourse of action when codes are violated.

The citizens of Brunswick should feel insulted by the attitude of our town officials regarding the condition of 16- 18 Oak St., owned by Jeffrey and Tammy Matthews of Topsham. This multi-family building burned on April 8, displacing 19 tenants.

Letters were written to town officials in June and July on behalf of the surrounding neighborhood requesting the town pressure Matthews to at least have the debris surrounding the building removed; to have it professionally boarded up (according to the United States Fire Administration Board- Up Procedures); the roof tarped; and the unsalvageable sections removed.

These procedures are intended to protect buildings that are temporarily vacant against weather and illegal entry pending decisions to rehabilitate or teardown.

The neighborhood wanted assurances from Matthews regarding his intentions for the property and requested that he submit to the town a plan of action and time frame for repairing or demolishing his building.

If Brunswick did not have sufficient codes for legal enforcement, then we strongly urged the town to appoint a citizen committee to study the issue and propose language for an ordinance that would include owner requirements for abandoned and burnt structures and inspection for fire safety issues of multi-family dwellings.

Now, more than eight months later, we still have a burned- out hulk sitting on Oak Street that categorizes the street as in decline, threatens the stability of the neighborhood and undermines the value of investments made by other property owners.

Vacant or abandoned structures are unsightly, known to attract criminal activity and are a threat to public safety. They not only drive down the value of surrounding properties but also increase costs for the police and fire departments that must take care of potential criminal activity that might take place in these structures.

A Nov. 1 report in The Times Record stated, “Codes Enforcement Officer Jeffrey Hutchinson said that the town has, so far, exhausted its options to compel cleanup of the property. … Town Manager Gary Brown said that there are no current violations at the property but that the town officials would consider action if the building remained unattended and deteriorating for a number of years.?

How many is “a number of years,” and can we afford to wait that long for neglect to decay the fabric of the neighborhood?

If we view housing as an important indicator of community values, then our goal should be to preserve and protect the quality of housing, to have affordable housing available to those who live and work in Brunswick, and to protect the character and values in these neighborhoods by maintaining and improving codes that encourage owners to maintain and improve their property investment.

Shouldn’t we set higher standards for ourselves and for our community to build on its historic character, economic vitality, and livability?

I urge town officials and the Downtown Master Plan Committee to work with stakeholders to develop an effective life-safety and fire prevention program for multifamily residential dwellings that would include: (a) identification and verification of all multi-family buildings in Brunswick; (b) inspection and prevention efforts targeted at occupancies based on actual and not perceived risks; (c) train residents on how to react to smoke detector activations; (d) inspection combined with prevention efforts for an effective program; and ( e) requirements and enforcement for the registration, maintenance and securing of vacant buildings and abandoned buildings.

These proposed guidelines come from a paper written by John Q. Webb, battalion chief of the Derry, ( N. H.) Fire Department.)

The community must embrace these codes to protect property, property values, the preservation of neighborhoods, and the welfare of all its citizens.

ANNE ‘VICKY’ MARR lives in Brunswick.