Housing code changes face concerns from landlords, affordable housing advocates

housing

BY LAUREN LINDSTROM JULY 03, 2019 12:41 PM 

Derelict property owners would be subject to higher fines and steeper legal penalties under proposed changes to Charlotte’s minimum housing code. 

The updated regulations represent the first change to the housing code since 2008. But the proposals have prompted concerns from real estate groups and affordable housing advocates alike as officials weigh increasing standards for safe, clean housing with the need to promote affordable housing.

Charlotte City Council’s Neighborhood Development Committee tabled a June vote to move the matter to full council, citing feedback from community groups. Discussions to update the housing code, which dictates minimum standards for residential dwellings in Charlotte, began with a request from the mayor’s office earlier this year. 

Council member Justin Harlow, who chairs the Neighborhood Development Committee, said Lake Arbor Apartments were top of mind. The west Charlotte complex got widespread attention after numerous resident complaints. Inspectors found units with no working heat or air conditioning, decaying floors, exposed electrical wires and pests.

“While that is not the only reason we are trying to tackle this, it peeled some layers back to say, ‘What is happening here? Are our standards high enough for property owners?” Harlow, a Democrat representing District 2, said. “Likely there are other Lake Arbors out there as far as massive, ridiculous housing violations.”

The proposed changes recommended by the city’s Housing and Neighborhood Services Department would require:

  • Existing kitchen exhaust equipment be operable, maintained and vented to the building’s exterior.
  • When air conditioning units are provided, they would need to be correctly installed and in working condition.
  • Roof drains, gutters and spouts be maintained without obstruction and designed to direct water away from the unit.
  • Kitchen and bathroom faucets to be properly secured and sealed.
  • Interior wall, ceiling finishes and trim be free of water intrusion stains or moisture damage. 
  • A temperature standard of 120 degrees Fahrenheit for water heaters.

The changes represent efforts to ensure structures and fixtures are safe and functional, said Jane Taillon, Charlotte’s code enforcement division manager.

“We want everyone to have a safe and healthy housing whether they own their own home or rent,” she said. “If a landlord provides you with something, we want it to be operational.”

Property owners also would face increased penalties, including:

  • Owners not compliant with ordered corrections would be fined $100 per day, an increase from the current $100 penalty on the first day of noncompliance, followed by $10 for each additional day.
  • A new $500-per day fine for not remedying “dangerous violations,” such as unsafe wiring or lack of working smoke detectors, within 48 hours. 
  • Convictions in environmental court upgraded from a Class 3 misdemeanor to a Class 2, which can include probation or up to 30 days in jail.

Only a small number of code violation cases result in fines. Of the nearly 7,500 code cases opened over the last three fiscal years, city officials issued civil penalties in just 95 of them, according to data presented to the housing committee. Eighty-five cases were referred to environmental court.

The proposed changes would also mandate enhanced inspections of entire multifamily complexes if a certain number of units there are inspected within a specific time period, a provision that could address systemic violations at complexes like Lake Arbor.

But some housing advocates are concerned the city’s efforts don’t directly affect residents’ biggest concerns. Jessica Moreno, a community organizer with Action NC, said the proposal doesn’t do enough to directly address mold, which was a frequent complaint from Lake Arbor residents. 

City officials have said they don’t have the authority to address mold directly, but several code violations target causes of mold, such as regulating drains and plumbing standards.

Kim Graham, executive director of the Greater Charlotte Apartment Association, said her organization wants to be sure the proposed changes aren’t financially burdensome to landlords, especially those of single-family homes or older properties.

“(We) raised concerns to make sure that we don’t have changes that ultimately work against affordability that will cause property owners…to incur additional costs because of the additional changes,” she said. She said she wouldn’t discuss specific problems with proposals while the organization was still discussing them with the city.

District 7 council member Ed Driggs said he’s in favor of amending the standards, but asked city staff for more information on the financial impact.

“How much will landlords have to spend compared to today to be in compliance? That’s probably going to manifest in the rent,” said Driggs, a Republican. “We don’t want to make it difficult to be an owner of affordable housing, to drive up rents or make people get out of the business.”

City council’s housing and neighborhood services committee will revisit the proposed changes at a July 17 meeting.

Public meetings on the issue are scheduled for 6 p.m. Tuesday at Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center, 600 E. 4th St., and 6 p.m. Thursday at the Tyvola Senior Center, 2225 Tyvola Road. Residents are also able to comment through an online survey on the city’s website.
Read more here: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article231908868.html#storylink=cpy

Charlotte City Council noise ordinance change met with resistance

noise ordinance vote

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Charlotte’s mayor and City Council were in their seats Monday night when protesters climbed on the dais holding a sign, while another protester shouted out a message against a noise ordinance change.

The council voted 8-3 on the noise ordinance, which bans amplified sound and excessive noise within 150 feet of churches, schools and medical facilities.

While council members backed away, two police officers stood by and watched until other officers joined them. The protesters shouted for almost three minutes before being taken into custody.

While the protesters said in their speech they were against the noise ordinance, they were from the abortion rights group Women’s Militant Front-Charlotte.

“While we unite with the pro-choice call to take power away from the anti-choicers, this cannot be done through the city or the state,” the group said on Twitter. “WMF demanded that the city give no platform to LoveLife.” 

Mayor Vi Lyles said this was her first experience of this kind at a meeting, but later said the disruption didn’t bother her at all.

More than 120 people signed up to address the Charlotte City Council.

“This is really about squelching free speech of those who are pro-life,” the Rev. Leon Threatt said.

Dozens of members of Love Life Charlotte sang and prayed in the lobby while the meeting was underway.

“Just because a nation has legalized something doesn’t make it morally right,” Love Life Charlotte founder Justin Reeder said.

Supporters of the Preferred Women’s Health Clinic on Latrobe Drive told the City Council the noise buffer is needed to “prevent harassment” of people seeking services.

“This is not a vote about abortion. It is about a right for all of our citizens to feel safe,” Sarah Haley said.

Clinic supporters held signs saying, “Harassment is not free speech.” Several cheered after the ordinance passed.

“We are not trying to make them not talk. We are only trying to make them not yell at loud decibels,” Betty Gunz said.

Council members Tariq Bokhari, Ed Driggs and Greg Phipps voted against the ordinance. Bokhari worried the city was “poking the hornet’s nest.”

[Handful of activists arrested after disrupting City Council meeting, Charlotte police say]

“Do we really need to make Charlotte a battleground of a national controversy?” Driggs said.

City leaders have said that the changes were created to be “content neutral” and not specifically target anti-abortion protesters. The noise ordinance change will not ban protests outside the clinic, just amplified sound and excess noise within 150 feet of the building.

“We are in the business of ensuring all residents have access to health care in a safe and respectful manner,” Councilwoman Dimple Ajmera said.

Former Mayor Pat McCrory said protesting on the street is fine, but letting protesters into council chambers is dangerous.

“I don’t think the protesters should have even gotten to the dais, because once you get to the dais, you get to the space of the safety of the elected officials,” said McCrory.

He’s concerned that police let the protesters go too far.

“When public officials’ safety is threatened, democracy is being threatened,” he said.

City Councilman Braxton Winston, who made his name protesting after a police shooting three years go, said he never felt threatened.

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department arrested three people and said several more got away.

“Like I said, there was no threat, so there’s nothing more I would have wanted to see CMPD do,” said Winston.

CMPD spokesperson Rob Tufano told Channel 9 the officers handled a tricky situation well.

“A situation that was clearly very volatile with a lot of high emotions running there, de-escalated. Got everyone down from that dais. Charged them appropriately so council could conduct the rest of their business that they had,” Tufano said.

Once the ban goes into effect on Oct. 1, the first violation will be a $100 fine. The second will be a $500 fine. After three or more violations in year, violaters will face a $1,000 fine. 

City Council questions CMPD checkpoints amid ICE raids

first responders

CMPD said the agency will not participate in ICE immigration enforcement operations, but some council members fear checkpoints create confusion.

Author: Nate MorabitoPublished: 5:05 PM EST February 12, 2019 Updated: 7:11 PM EST February 12, 2019

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Leaders raised new concerns about sobriety checkpoints at last night’s Charlotte City Council meeting after a saturation patrol coincided on the same day and the same side of town as an Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid. 

Council members were supposed to be approving a generally non-controversial grant for the city’s DWI task force, which they ultimately did, but not before heated discussion. 

Several council members questioned Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department’s traffic safety checkpoints. CMPD said those checkpoints are held at specific locations that need more proactive enforcement based on data. 

An NBC Charlotte Defenders investigation found the checkpoints mostly result in the arrests and ticketing of sober drivers for less serious crimes.

“It carries levels of consequence that are inequitable around different parts of town,” Councilmember Braxton Winston said.

The approval of the grant came on the heels of ICE raids described as “the new normal.” Some leaders fear those federal raids coupled with local targeted policing result in a negative public perception.

“It creates confusion,” Councilmember Larken Egleston said. “It creates additional anxiety than what’s already there.”

CMPD said the fact that one of the ICE raids fell on the same day, but different time as a local DWI saturation patrol was simply a coincidence. 

CMPD said its DWI task force makes enforcement decisions without consulting with federal counterparts and is not given any forewarning of potential ICE raids. Instead, the DWI task force is focused strictly on keeping the roads safe.

“I think the idea that there was some sort of collusion with anybody else is just disrespectful to our police department,” Councilmember Ed Driggs said, later adding, “This has been politicized and distorted.”

Just last week, CMPD made it clear the agency has not and will not participate in ICE immigration enforcement operations. Earlier this month, ICE raids led to the arrests of 200 illegal immigrants in North Carolina.