The proposal to enact a maintenance code for commercial buildings in the city has become entwined in the debate over whether to fill the job of assistant fire chief.
That makes the planned discussion of the maintenance code at tonight’s City Council meeting a potential double whammy on city-county relations.
At immediate issue tonight is Henderson’s chance to become what City Attorney John Zollicoffer says would be the first municipality in North Carolina with a maintenance code that applies to nonresidential buildings. The legislation comes in response to concerns about the deterioration of some commercial buildings downtown but would apply throughout the city and the Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction.
The legislation also reflects frustration among city officials at the difficulty of getting the county to aggressively enforce the state building code. The county, not the city, has the power to inspect and condemn buildings under that code, but Henderson has to pay Vance County for every inspection request it makes. And Planning Director Grace Smith has said the inspection fee is just the start of the charges the city would incur to pursue run-down buildings in that way.
Zollicoffer has drafted local legislation for the General Assembly to amend the city charter so that the City Council could adopt a commercial maintenance code. Because Tuesday is the deadline for the submission of local legislation that requires drafting by the state Attorney General’s Office, the council and city administration are operating on the assumption that a failure to endorse the legislation tonight will doom the maintenance code until next year.
Council member Elissa Yount, one of the prime movers behind the maintenance code, has asked that the city management answer the question of whether the council must act tonight.
The city attorney based his legislative draft on the state’s minimum housing code, essentially applying the livability standards for homes to commercial buildings. The legislation would add a section to the city charter calling for buildings to meet minimum standards on maintenance, sanitation and safety.
A designated “public officer” would have the power to investigate when a building appeared not to comply with city standards. Finding evidence of problems, the public officer would then issue a complaint and schedule a hearing. If the public officer determined that the building jeopardized the safety or health of occupants or the general public or otherwise failed to meet a yet-to-be-written building maintenance code, the building’s owner could be ordered to make repairs or, in an extreme case, demolish the structure.
Failure to carry out ordered repairs would lead to an order to vacate the building, which would be declared “unfit for any use.” If an owner ignored an order to demolish a building, the city would tear it down and place a lien on the real estate and any other commercial property held by the same owner within the city.
The legislation also allows the city to levy civil penalties for failure to obey the maintenance code.
It’s important to understand that even if the council endorses the legislation and the General Assembly enacts it, Henderson still won’t have an ordinance addressing the upkeep of commercial buildings. The legislation merely gives the city the power to create such an ordinance.
It would be up to the City Council to pass such an ordinance, which would address such issues as whether to include the ETJ, what exactly to cover in the maintenance code, and to whom to give the power and responsibility of enforcing the ordinance.
Still, those issues came up during a meeting of the council’s Community Development Committee on Tuesday. Yount was the only member of the committee there, but Zollicoffer, Smith, City Manager Eric Williams, Downtown Development Commission head Sheri Jones, Code Compliance Director Corey Williams, Fire Chief Danny Wilkerson and fire inspector Mike Anderson were among the people at the meeting.
Eric Williams said he didn’t think the city should overextend itself and try to enforce the standards in the ETJ, just as it makes no attempt to apply ordinances on residential buildings in that border region surrounding the city. He got no disagreement, just a reminder that the enabling legislation allows the code to cover the ETJ; it does not require such coverage.
As for the specifics of the maintenance code, Yount passed around a list of suggestions from George Harvin of Rosemyr, which has substantial property holdings downtown.
Harvin’s list, which was not meant to be comprehensive:
* Building facades to be solid with no broken wood, tile, stone or bricks.
* Building facades to be clean.
* No broken or cracked window panes.
* Broken shutters or torn awnings to be repaired, replaced or removed.
* All exterior doors to be fully functional, including locks.
* Roofs to be kept safe and leak-free.
* Gutters and downspouts to be fully functional.
* All signs in good repair.
* No outside storage or display on sidewalks.
* Proper disposal of all trash to maintain a neat, clean appearance.
* Landscaping to be weed-free, with neatly mowed grass.
Zollicoffer said some of those items are covered by existing laws, such as the weeded-lot ordinance. But Yount said the important thing now is to mention the existence of a nonresidential building maintenance code in the enabling legislation; the contents of that code can be debated later.
The issue of who would enforce the ordinance dominated Tuesday’s meeting and spilled over to a Finance and Intergovernmental Relations Committee meeting Friday, despite Yount’s contention that enforcement is an issue for later and is a decision for the city manager to make.
Williams said he wants the council to know what that decision will be before it acts tonight. “I want to tell you where I’m coming from. How does the manager intend to get this enforced?”
He laid out the possibilities for enforcing the maintenance code: Smith and the Planning and Community Development Department; Jones, who falls under Smith’s department; Corey Williams and the Code Compliance Department; and Wilkerson and the Fire Department.
At the meeting and in a follow-up memo sent out Thursday, Williams argued for the Fire Department to take on enforcement of the maintenance code.
He said the Planning Department has more than enough to handle with the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Adjustment, the Rural Planning Organization for transportation, City Council needs, the application for and management of Community Development Block Grants, the development process in the city and the ETJ, the creation of a new land-use plan, and involvement in Embassy Square and high-speed rail. He noted that a vacant position in the department is not likely to be filled in the next fiscal year.
He said Jones, as Main Street Program manager, has her hands full running a one-person operation that is focused on promotion and marketing rather than enforcement and has responsibility for many special events. He also noted that Jones has no training in inspections.
As for the Code Compliance Department, Williams said Corey Williams has only one person helping him, has only one vehicle, is still getting a handle on operations and on efforts to eliminate overgrown lots and abandoned houses, and has his hands full supporting the Clean Up Henderson Committee. (The Code Compliance Department’s role with the cleanup committee is to submit a one-page biweekly report, as do the Police and Public Works departments; to handle the mailing of meeting agendas; and to note concerns or complaints raised at meetings.)
That, Eric Williams said, leaves the Fire Department. He said Wilkerson’s department has plenty of vehicles to conduct surveys of commercial buildings and has a certified inspector in Anderson who is used to checking out commercial buildings for violations that “are closely, if not directly, aligned with the proposed new Maintenance Code Regulations.”
Williams also pointed to the authority provided by the Fire Department’s uniforms and the support services offered by a full-time secretary, although Wilkerson said the secretary serves the county and city departments.
Wilkerson did not like the idea, saying that the Code Compliance Department is the obvious choice and that Anderson has no free time for maintenance inspections.
But what seemed to aggravate Wilkerson the most was that Williams linked the enforcement of the potential ordinance to the hiring of an assistant fire chief, a position that was vacated by retirement last June.
Williams has not supported filling that post, despite Wilkerson’s pleas and a fire services agreement with Vance County that calls for the department to have an assistant chief. That contract is worth $115,000 to the city, but without an assistant chief, Wilkerson has said, the city isn’t doing its part and could lose $60,000 of that county funding.
Wilkerson finally got to make that case at Friday’s FAIR Committee meeting, and he upped the ante on Williams.
In his memo, Williams wrote that one department at the Community Development Committee meeting said that “we object, can’t do it, won’t do it, etc. etc.” That was a clear reference to Wilkerson, who said he didn’t want the maintenance code enforcement and didn’t have the staff to enforce that code and enforce the fire code but who never said he wouldn’t do the job if assigned it.
In response, Wilkerson proposed that if the Fire Department is to be given the duty of enforcing a maintenance code, then all code enforcement should be folded into his department in a new division including Anderson and Corey Williams.
“That would streamline the process,” Wilkerson said, and would allow cross-training among the inspectors.
Council member Mary Emma Evans jumped into the fray, concerned that a minority department head, Williams, would be downgraded to a member of three-person division.
Thus, the original goal of enforcing similar standards on commercial buildings as are placed on residential buildings has expanded to include two areas of city-county cooperation (or the lack of it), budget and staffing issues, and the question of whether the city does enough to promote minority advancement.