Code Attorney

Lynne Page Snyder from NASCSP, the National Association for State Community Services Programs,  spoke about “weatherization plus health” at the Springfield conference.  Funds from the Department of Energy’s Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) and DHHS Community Services Block Grants are being used to assist low-income families to improve the energy efficiency of low-income homes.  NASCSP is a professional membership organization for the State and territorial administrators of these programs.  WAP’s mission is to reduce energy costs for low-income families, particularly for the elderly, people with disabilities, and children, while ensuring their health and safety.  While the weatherization assistance program is not specifically aimed at creating healthy homes, it can lead to fixing property maintenance problems.  For example, kitchen and bath exhaust fans may be installed to combat mold and moisture problems.  Window replacements may reduce lead paint hazards.  NASCSP has put on conferences around the country to try and connect organizations and do cross-training.  It is launching a public website soon that will map WAP and healthy homes programs nationwide.

When I am in court, my focus is on the safety of the building that is the subject of my prosecution.  I don’t know that I’ve paid that much attention to the effect that the problem with the property is having on the long term health of the residents.  It certainly has been a concern when there is an immediate hazard but otherwise I haven’t really concentrated on what the implications are to general health.  That is why it was wonderful to have the opportunity to meet professionals for whom this is a great concern.

Amy McLean Sales from the National Center for Healthy Housing spoke at the conference about the seven principles of healthy housing.  They are:

Dry: Damp houses provide a nurturing environment for mites, roaches, rodents, and molds, all of which are associated with asthma.

Clean: Clean homes help reduce pest infestations and exposure to contaminants.

Pest-Free: Recent studies show a causal relationship between exposure to mice and cockroaches and asthma episodes in children; yet inappropriate treatment for pest infestations can exacerbate health problems, since pesticide residues in homes pose risks for neurological damage and cancer.

Safe: The majority of injuries among children occur in the home. Falls are the most frequent cause of residential injuries to children, followed by injuries from objects in the home, burns, and poisonings.

Contaminant-Free: Chemical exposures include lead, radon, pesticides, volatile organic compounds, and environmental tobacco smoke. Exposures to asbestos particles, radon gas, carbon monoxide, and second-hand tobacco smoke are far higher indoors than outside.

Ventilated: Studies show that increasing the fresh air supply in a home improves respiratory health.

Maintained: Poorly-maintained homes are at risk for moisture and pest problems. Deteriorated lead-based paint in older housing is the primary cause of lead poisoning, which affects some 240,000 U.S. children.

These principles apply to many of the homes that have been the object of court cases I have handled.

Amy also showed statistics that communities of color are more likely to live in unhealthy housing. I would imagine a lot of the housing is rental property not maintained by the landlords.  I asked her about resources to help people in this economic environment to fix properties in need of repair but she is as frustrated as I am because of the lack of money available to help people who need assistance to fix a deteriorating property.  The grim reality is that if we don’t do something now, they will be the properties we will need to demolish 5 years or 10 years from now.

This week I was a speaker at the 2011 Lead Poisoning Prevention Conference in Springfield, IL that was about so much more than lead poisoning. It was really about healthy homes and covered a wide range of topics.  What I learned was so valuable that I will be writing various posts about it and adding new links to this site that contain valuable information. The conference was put on by the Illinois Department of Public Health, St. John’s Children’s Hospital, Kohl’s Department Stores and the Illinois Public Health association.

One of the ways that local jurisdictions are enforcing the renovation, repair and painting requirements of the EPA with regards to lead paint, is to refuse to issue a building permit to a contractor who is working on a pre-1978 residence if it does not qualify as an exception to the law unless the contractor provides proof of certification as a renovation firm.  I spoke with the inspector from Rock Falls, IL who follows this procedure.  He told me that under his code, he is responsible for enforcing federal, state and local statutes so he has authority to take this action.  But, before implementing this, he contacted a trainer who agreed to come out to Rock Falls and train, at a discount, any contractor who wanted to sign up for a weekend training. It was a huge success because it was convenient and the price was right.  He’s been able to get hundreds of firms qualified to do the work. This is a great example of a creative solution and I wanted to share it.  He says the program is running smoothly and he has very few problems.

One of the very unfortunate consequences of the economic downturn is the layoff of code enforcement personnel.  Peoria, Illinois is facing the layoff of about 1/3 of its staff.  I’ve had the good fortune of doing a number of training days in or near Peoria.  As with many cities, it struggles hard to prevent blight.  I fear a spiraling down effect in cities and towns where budget cuts leads to weaker enforcement which leads to more problems in neighborhoods that are already struggling.  The inspectors I work with are already doing as much as they can to deal with problem properties.  What will some of these towns and cities look like in 10 years because of the decisions we are making today?

A ten year old structure in Oregon called Courthouse Square is now abandoned due to structural defects.  An article in the Statesman Journal discusses how this came about and suggests solutions including peer to peer reviews of building plans. The biggest problem with the project was in the structural design. The author of the article said:

While plan review is a safeguard for public safety, jurisdictions place heavy reliance on licensed engineers to do the jobs correctly.

But who oversees those professionals?   That's the questioned raised by this unfortunate situation.

The  Virginia-Pilot has a story about a person who built a 2 story structure without a permit and was finally found out by the building department.  Despite the fact that I have written extensively about the negative consequences of building without a permit (see my last book, The Building Process Simplified), I am still amazed at the brazenness of people who think they won’t get caught even though they are building something everyone can see!  I suppose they hope they’ll get by with a small fine and an apology but will be allowed to keep the illegal structure.  While a few might get a variance or pass inspection, many of these structures have to be torn down.  Most people who do this are trying to avoid paying for the permits or the other costs of compliance.  I have had many of them argue with me in court when they are prosecuted even though the violation is clear.  The costs they incur when they are caught far exceed the cost of the permit.

NPR did a story yesterday on how some banks have decided to demolish foreclosed properties in Cleveland and give the land to local government for its land bank because it’s a way to save save the costs of servicing these properties with the added benefit that it helps stabilize the neighborhood.  The agreement was described this way:

The Cuyahoga County Land Bank, a quasi-government corporation, offered lenders a deal: We’ll take your worst houses, if you pay to knock them down. This year, Fannie Mae and some of the country’s biggest lenders — including Bank of America, Citibank and Wells Fargo — will help pay for half of the land bank’s 700 scheduled demolitions.

Based on what I’m seeing, it makes sense to demolish these residences sooner, rather than later.  I’ve seen homes open to raccoons and water damage that just keep deteriorating.  No one is ever going to buy them and fix them up.  With the banks sharing the cost of demolition in these circumstances, it becomes possible to stop the trend toward blight in the surrounding community. The vacant land can be used as green space or bought by someone who wants to build a new residence.  We’re finding that in some circumstances these properties are more marketable if the derelict house is gone.

Persons who do work without a permit or allow bedrooms in basements that are in violation of the building code risk more than fines.  In a tragic case in Ann Arbor, a homeowner’s daughter died along with another person because of a fire in the basement.  The owner was charged with renting without a certificate of compliance, illegal occupancy of the basement, inadequate smoke detectors, and inadequate exits from the basement by the local prosecutor. The public just doesn’t understand how building inspectors save lives.

The Chicago Tribune has taken on lenders over the devastation that has befallen neighborhoods while they sit back and let property deteriorate.  I’ve noticed a phenomenon in my practice when I’ve researched properties in foreclosure that have code violations. Lately I am seeing more and more foreclosure actions that are stalled after the lender obtains a judgment of foreclosure.  No sheriff sale takes place or the sale is canceled.  The lender doesn’t take the steps to get the deed and tells the local government that it’s not responsible for the property even though the owner is long gone.  The article in the Tribune discusses the consequences of such business practices:

Such legal maneuvers by banks, which in many cases either walk away from properties that aren’t worth selling or let foreclosure proceedings languish in an overwhelmed court system, have left thousands of dilapidated vacant houses in ownership limbo citywide.

At the same time, the financial industry is fighting against proposed legislation in Illinois that would make it responsible for the upkeep of a property once a foreclosure suit has been filed if the property is vacant.

Insurance companies can be allies in the fight for life/safety compliance. They have considerable power over property. If persons insured by the companies don’t live up to the standards of the policy, they may lose their insurance benefits.   A judge in Massachusetts has ruled that an insurance company does not have to pay for a fire that occurred at a restaurant because the owner did not properly maintain a fire suppression system. The Insurance Journal reports:

At issue is an exclusion in a commercial lines policy issued to the French King restaurant in Erving, which required the restaurant owner to maintain a fire suppression system. The insurer — Interstate Fire & Casualty Co., a subsidiary of Fireman’s Fund — claimed that the fire-suppression system installed at the restaurant was obsolete, and therefore triggered the exclusion and did not require them to indemnify the restaurant.

The court agreed and ordered the restaurant to pay back the $15,000 advance given to the owner before the investigation was completed.  I’ve always wished there was a separate registry of properties and their insurance companies so inspectors could alert the insurance company about dangerous conditions. (I make no comment as to whether this might violate privacy laws in some states).  Most owners will act so they don’t lose their insurance unlike the owner in this case.  The article said that the owner could have upgraded his system for $3,250. Unfortunately, fire inspectors have to repeatedly try and obtain compliance because of the real threat of fire while some owners only see the extra cost to themselves when asked to comply.