RED BANK: WITH COURT RULING, BOROUGH CLEARS BANK STREET JUNKYARD

Workers haul away three decades of junk at 90 Bank Street Tuesday morning. (Photo by Brian Donohue. Click to enlarge.)

By BRIAN DONOHUE

The Borough of Red Bank’s decades-long legal battle with a Bank Street man over code violations on his property ended in a jaw-dropping neighborhood spectacle Tuesday, as borough crews armed with a judge’s ruling descended on the property and began the massive job of hauling away mountains of junk and vehicles.

William Poku, the property owner who has repeatedly filed legal appeals and lawsuits against the Borough, was not on site as workers began work shortly before 8 am. He had left as the first workers arrived.

By 9 am, with the road closed to traffic, the crew of a dozen workers had filled three dumpsters and had barely worked past the chain link fence at the front of the property at 90 Bank Street, exposing a head-high wall of trash covering between nine and thirteen disabled vehicles on the 9,600 square foot lot. Until they could reach the back yard, no one could tell for sure how many vehicles were there.

Two front-end loaders were brought in along with multiple tow trucks. Borough Manager Jim Gant, Borough Attorney Gregory Cannon, the police and fire chiefs, a half dozen police officers and public workers oversaw the work by First OnSite, a property restoration firm that specializes in cleanup after fires, floods and disasters.

An assembly line of workers pulled stacks of lumber, bricks, roof shingles, boxes, umbrellas, a trampoline and broken toys and tossed them in dumpsters.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by redbankgreen (@redbankgreen)

The first vehicle, an ancient South Jersey Fiberglass work van that has sat at the end of the unpaved driveway for two decades, was pulled out by a tow truck with officials audibly fretting it might collapse under its own weight. The truck, too, was filled to roof with boxes, shoes, and unidentifiable junk.

Stray cats scurried from the property as a longtime contractor fretted about nesting racoons and other wildlife they might encounter. An First OnSIte worker who has worked many hoarder-type scenarios, ranked it among the worst he had ever seen.

And Cleveland the Tailor stood on the sidewalk holding up his phone so he could Facetime a video feed to his sister in Georgia.

“Wow,” he said. “You’ll be able to see the house.”

Asked his opinion of the operation, he said, “It’s a good thing.”

In a statement, Borough Manager Jim Gant called the move essential to address what he called an “ongoing public health and safety concern.”

“This action is simply about enforcing the law, protecting the community, and bringing a long-standing situation into compliance after all reasonable alternatives were exhausted,” he said in a statement emailed to redbankgreen. (See Gant’s full statement below.)

Poku’s legal battles to keep the trash he has said is essential to his “livelihood” are the stuff of neighborhood and courthouse legend.

The earliest summons on record, for an inoperable vehicle on the premises, dates to January, 1995, according to digital municipal court records.

The most recent was a series of violations for junk-laden vehicles parked on the street during a parking ban for emergency utility work last winter. In 2021, he was fined $11,231. Poku still owes $9,910 according to online muncipal court records.

In between, there have been appeals and counter claims against police officers, borough officials, a borough-contracted towing company and written legal threats against redbankgreen for its coverage of it all. Cannon has labelled Poku a “vexatious litigiant” who currently has mulitiple pending lawsuits against the borough.

Poku is also in a disagreement with leadership of the New Jersey NAACP over his stated status as the president of the organization’s Red Bank chapter.

Through it all, the junk piles grew, filling every inch of the yard and porch, and over the past year blocking the front walkway to the property and covering parts of the sidewalk.

Privately, members of Red Bank’s volunteer fire department said they shivered every time a call went out for even a false alarm on Bank Street, fearing what might happen if a fire broke out at the fuel-laden property 90 Bank Street.

On October 16, Borough Attorney Cannon issued a Notice and Demand for Abatement under Red Bank Borough property maintenance codes, listing seven violations creating hazardous conditions. The notice ordered Poku to abate the conditions within 15 days or have the work borough done by the borough “at the cost and expense of the owner.” Those expenses would be recoverable by a lien on the property, the notice says.

WiIlliam Poku addresses Borough Attorney Gregory Cannon at the October 23 meeting of the Mayor and Borough Council a few days after Cannon issued the demand for Poku to clean up his property. (Photo by Brian Donohue.)

Poku brought a motion in state Chancery court to block the order, Cannon said. That motion was dismissed by Judge Mara Zazzali-Hogan on Nov. 19, he said.

As the work began, residents said they were happy to see the junk finally cleared.

“This has always been about keeping people safe, especially with the fire risk,” said neighbor Mark Gregory. “We appreciate the time and care that went into addressing the situation.” Several neighbors echoed Gregory’s sentiment but declined to speak on record out of concern that they could be sued themselves.

Cannon and Gant said the remediation work would be limited to the yard and outside of the home.

As the front-end loader cleared a view unseen for decades, however, the structure could be seen to be bulging from the inside and breaking apart.

Given the history of litigation, even once the junk is cleared, Cannon said he expects the legal battles aren’t over.

“We expect there will be more legal process,” he said.

Here is Gant’s full statement:

“The conditions at 90 Bank Street have existed for far too long and have been the subject of repeated code enforcement actions, court proceedings, and extended litigation. Over many years, the Borough provided the owner with more than sufficient time and opportunity to voluntarily remediate the property and also offered assistance, which was declined. Instead, prolonged noncompliance and delay have resulted in unnecessary use of municipal staff time, legal resources, and taxpayer dollars. The conditions at this property rise beyond a simple code matter and constitute an ongoing public health and safety concern. Blatant and continued disregard for our Borough code and the impacts on neighboring residents and taxpayers will no longer be tolerated. This action is simply about enforcing the law, protecting the community, and bringing a long-standing situation into compliance after all reasonable alternatives were exhausted.”