2022.02.08 WS Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

23A Guide to Proactive Rental Inspection Programschangelabsolutions.org CHALLENGES WHEN IMPLEMENTING PRI PROGRAMS PRI programs can yield important improvements in a locality’s housing stock. But they may also amplify many of the challenges that arise with traditional complaint-based programs, because (1) proactive inspection programs typically bring inspectors into contact with a much wider cross-section of a locality’s housing, and (2) inspections are not initiated exclusively by tenant complaints. In some cases, code enforcement activities can potentially result in displacement of tenants. This section examines some common challenges, and the following section offers strategies for addressing these challenges to maximize the effectiveness and benefits of PRI programs. Uninhabitable and “Illegal” Units In extreme cases, an inspector may find substandard conditions that immediately threaten the health and safety of residents. PRI programs should include measures that require landlords to fix properties quickly; however, in the worst cases, the locality may require a tenant to vacate the property. Inspectors may also encounter “illegal” units: units that have not been registered or licensed, and units that exist in violation of zoning or building codes. Where possible, localities should aim to bring units into compliance to preserve rental housing stock. Where uninhabitable or illegal units cannot be brought into compliance, relocation programs and supportive social programs, discussed in more detail below, are critical to ensure that tenants remain housed. Tenant-Side Code Violations Because PRI program inspectors are not only invited into rental housing units by tenants filing complaints, they are more likely to uncover tenant-side code violations or illegal occupancies than they would under complaint-based programs. Because the central goal of proactive rental inspection programs is to maintain housing in safe and healthy condition, code enforcement should prioritize remedying such violations rather than displacing tenants from their homes. Hoarding: About three to five percent of Americans suffer from hoarding.160, 161, 162, 163 Severe hoarding not only puts a tenant and other occupants of a housing unit at risk, but may place neighboring residents at risk of fire, disease, or infestation of vermin.164, 165, 166 This disorder is not widely understood and localities often struggle with effective ways to address hoarding.167 For example, one study out of New York found that “almost a quarter of individuals seeking help for housing problems from a community eviction prevention organization met the criteria for [hoarding disorder]; only about half of these individuals were receiving mental health treatment.”168 However, as hoarding is a form of mental illness,169 localities should identify ways to assist hoarders without rendering them homeless.170, 171 VENTURA, CA: INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS In the initial phase of the city’s proactive inspection program, inspectors in Ventura, CA found 15 illegal converted rental units—just a small fraction of the 300-500 such units that officials believe exist. In order to meet the city’s commitment to address substandard housing and promote a healthy environment, staff made an innovative recommendation, informed by a collaboration with community members: Grant amnesty to illegally converted units for 30 months, suspending all fines and penalties while owners brought the units up to code. Eligibility was confined to second units on properties that allowed residential use, with an occupancy date prior to the city council’s initial action. Low-income landlords were also eligible for newly created Affordable Rental Housing Preservation Loans to cover the cost of compliance, on the condition that tenants be charged federally established affordable rates for the duration of the 15-year loan term.158 The program includes an educational component, bases fees on the in-service date (when the property was first occupied), and waives zoning violations that do not impact health and safety, including setbacks, lot coverage, and on-site parking requirements. As of August 2013, the city had received 53 applications, and had inspected and approved 41 properties, with another 5 in process.159