REGULATORY ROLE IS AT THE HEART OF MAINTENANCE CODE DEBATE

In the mid 1960s, cities throughout the United States began to adopt housing codes in order to qualify for federal urban renewal funds.

While most cities readily adopted codes regulating new construction and building renovation, some also introduced laws that impose standards for existing buildings.

Cities adopting such codes at first were required to inspect every property to ensure that buildings were safe and san~itary. But that charge turned out to be unrealistic.

Political flak and the enormous staff burden of trying to inspect every property in a particular city seemed impractical, if not impossible.

Many cities kept their codes intact, but simply opted to enforce the laws only upon receipt of a complaint about a substandard building.

Other cities chose to selectively enforce minimum property maintenance codes in certain parts of town, while exempting others.

However, such discriminating enforcement resulted in lawsuits; many cities were forced to scrap the process. Rarely, though, was the housing code itself abandoned.

Cape Girardeau never adopted such a code, relying instead on property owners to take the initiative to maintain their own buildings.

But, as in those cities where the code was maintained despite enforcement difficulties, many people insist that government should mandate some minimum standard.

The Cape Girardeau City Council now is poring over the Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) version of a national minimum property maintenance code. The council is expected to consider adoption of some version of the code within the next month or two.

The city's Board of Appeals recommended adoption of the BOCA code, and at a recent meeting board chairman Ralph Flori Jr. said it's time Cape Girardeau began to regulate property maintenance.

Flori said, "You've got to have some level of standards."

"You've got one," replied Frank Bean, a local developer and landlord. "It's called the free market."

In several interviews during the past week in cities that have codes similar to the one being considered here, officials, property owners and landlords expressed sentiments similar to those of Flori and Bean.

Whether government should regulate standards for existing structures and, if so, to what extent is the crux of the building code debate.

Most housing inspection officials believe the code, however it's enforced, is better than no code at all and is an effective way to maintain a city's housing stock.

But those most affected by the regulation property owners and managers are divided over the government's role in deciding how they should handle their buildings.

Generally, complaints and resistance are most common in those cities with the most dogged enforcement of housing codes.

But even in cities where enforcement is triggered by complaints about specific properties such as is being proposed for Cape Girardeau some consider the regulation a meddlesome intrusion that too often involves the mediation of landlord-tenant disputes.

In the course of studying property maintenance codes in several cities, some common effects of the regulation emerged.

20Property owners and code officials agree that in most cities there is a market for substandard, inexpensive housing and that enforce~ment of a property main~tenance code can crush that market.

Property owners will either spend the money to fix up substandard buildings and pass those costs on to tenants (through higher rent), or they'll simply refuse to rent the properties.

20In areas where there's a high concentration of older, substandard housing, enforcement of a building code will result in abandonment and, ultimately, demolition of buildings.

Again, the loss of these properties most affects those low-income tenants who are unable to afford anything but the cheapest housing. If a property is deemed unsafe, the tenant is forced to vacate immediately, or at most within 30 days, and find other housing.

Enforcement methods are continually changing. Complaint-based inspections often arouse criticism because they force one property owner to fix up a house while a neighboring, equally dilapidated property goes untouched because it hasn't triggered a complaint.

Other enforcement tools periodic inspections of all rental properties and inspections prompted by a change in occupancy can muddy real estate transactions and mire otherwise law-abiding property owners in drawn-out court proceedings.

As with most government programs, a property maintenance inspections department will grow before it shrinks; its reach expands before it recedes.

In all the cities examined for this series Columbia, University City, St. Joseph, Paducah, Ky., Carbondale, Ill., and others none have reduced enforcement efforts once a property code was adopted and most have expanded or will soon.

But officials in those cities contend that the property maintenance code has worked. Without it, they said, the housing stock would have deteriorated more rapidly and to a greater extent.

Here is a sampling of remarks about building maintenance codes in various cities.

Walter Stradal, president of the St. Louis Realtors Association, said that "without question," if St. Louis and the surrounding area had no property maintenance code, "the housing stock in all the areas would be lessened.

"Properly done, a property code can be the best thing that ever happened," Stradal added. "Improperly done, it could be the worst. It's a two-edged sword."

Al Goldman, planning director at University City, said housing values there were on the decline for a long time prior to enforcement of a property maintenance code.

"They were so low that if we didn't have a program like this to force repairs, we would have had a lot more neglected properties and abandonment," Goldman said.

Bud Scott, project and maintenance coordinator for American Properties Management in St. Joseph, said of the code: "In most cases it's good. It kind of eliminates slumlords and keeps the property somewhat safe to live in. A code in that line is excellent."

Larry Monroe, chief inspector for Columbia's existing buildings inspection program, said that city has "probably the best housing stock" in Missouri. "Certainly one of the reasons for that is this code," he added.

But Elinor Arendt, owner of Action Realty and Total Management Company in Columbia, had this to say of property maintenance codes: "All it does is add more people in city government to enforce it, adds more cost to the owners and more cost to the renters.

"I'm one of those people that believes in letting the market take care of itself and keeping the government out of it," Arendt added.

Fred Cooper, a landlord in Columbia with about 500 rental units, said he had "mixed emotions" about the regulations.

"In some respects it's a good idea, then in other respects it unfortunately takes on all the bad things about big government," Cooper said. "It's just another bureaucratic thing that just keeps on growing and growing."

Monday's installment of this series will look at how University City one of the first cities in the United States to adopt minimum building codes uses occupancy permits to enforce its maintenance code.