Cities leery of inspection bill

Some worry measure might hurt housing safety

DURHAM -- As he traipsed through the overgrown lawn outside the vacant, crumbling house on South Roxboro Road, housing inspector David Jones Jr. worried that a proposed state law might prevent this kind of inspection in the future.

The bill would require inspectors to have probable cause, such as a formal complaint, before inspecting a property and writing it up for violations.

"It could eliminate an inspector's initiative to get out and eliminate violations," said Jones, who noticed the house's porch collapsing during his daily rounds. "At least 90 percent is left up to our call. If I notice something that doesn't look quite right, somebody else is going to notice it, too."

The bill's backers, including various real estate and landlord industry groups, say it wouldn't impede inspectors' ability to enforce obvious code violations, such as crumbling roofs or cinder-block-propped cars on the lawn.

Its intent, they say, is to prevent wholesale annual housing inspections of rental properties, which already occur in Greensboro and some other North Carolina cities.

But officials in Raleigh, Durham and elsewhere worry the bill at least would have a chilling effect on inspections, which are seen as a key part of improving public safety. Neighborhoods full of run-down houses are breeding grounds for crime, the thinking goes. The two big Triangle cities have joined the N.C. League of Municipalities in opposing the bill, which was passed by the state Senate last year and awaits a House hearing when the legislature convenes next month.

Durham leaders, including Mayor Bill Bell, say they have no specific plans to start a comprehensive inspection program, but they'd like to retain the option to do so. The Neighborhood Improvement Services department has proposed adding a provision to the minimum housing code that would allow "a periodic and routine program of inspection of dwellings." Several City Council members said they will support adding the new language.

Wanda Page, Durham's deputy city manager, said revising the code is not an attempt to get something on the books ahead of possible bill passage. Rather, it's intended to "better describe the program of inspection we now have."

That includes comprehensive inspections in certain targeted area, such as the 2-square-mile area in Northeast Central Durham that is the target of a crime-abatement effort called Operation Bull's Eye. So far, 330 letters about housing code violations have been sent to area property owners.

Such a targeted blanket inspection program would still be allowed under the proposed bill, said Colin Crossman, head of government affairs for the Triangle Apartment Association, one of the industry groups lobbying for the bill.

Crossman said wholesale inspection programs waste time and eat up resources. "If you're inspecting everyone in the city, you're catching a lot of dolphins with your fish," Crossman said. "That doesn't really solve anything."

Durham officials agree, to an extent. Page, the deputy city manager, said that Durham has eight housing inspectors to cover the entire city and that many more would be needed to implement a comprehensive program.

Rental housing

City officials also object to another part of the bill that would bar them from discriminating between housing types, such as free-standing houses versus apartments.

Durham officials note that most housing violations occur in rental housing, and they'd like to focus their efforts there. Neighborhood Improvement department heads want to add a clause in the minimum housing code that would allow them to do so.