soldiergirl | Arkansas news, politics, opinion, restaurants, music, movies and art

Member since Jul 14, 2010

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »


Recent Comments

Re: “Urban living

I would have to concur! That house at 611 may not have had any "recorded" complaints because, "hello" it was the Mayor's house. Not one soul has ever occupied that house at 611. Why is that? Is it due to the fact that no work has been done since some gutting of the property in 2006? Kind of hard to live in what is not inhabitable. Is there any laws or statutes against owning property without any inhabitance, no tenants, not even using it as a rental property? How come the mere fact that no "progress" has been until last weekend not enough tonget the Mayor into environmental court like other people in downtown Little Rock? How much progress constitutes progress? Who and what constitutes a failure to maintain? Shiela Reynolds? Or is there a magic number of complaints by certain citizens that push a home owner into environmental court over a "failure to maintain?" Or does that only apply to the "low hanging fruit?" These are the easy in state or local property owners that the city doesn't have to make much effort to find in order to drag them into court. I would have to say no work or inhabitance of property in over fours years should require answering to someone. Sounds like "failure to maintain" to me..................

Posted by soldiergirl on 07/14/2010 at 10:01 PM


© 2019 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation