ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Tuesday, March 12, 1996 TAG: 9603120055
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: VERNON M. DANIELSEN
THERE IS a lot of verbal exchange going on about the condition of apartments in Roanoke, and an equal amount of bashing of unethical landlords who care more about money than the health and well-being of their tenants. It's another example of politicians and government bureaucrats trying to prove that it wasn't their fault that five people died in a fire.
What about protecting the vast majority of good, honest, ethical business people who do their jobs and keep good rental property? What about the tenants' responsibilities to perform reasonable maintenance and cleaning, to say nothing about informing the landlord of problems before they become major?
If the rhetoric from politicians about going only after the "bad guys" is true, why not do just that? The proposed approach is another example of excessive government regulation - how government gets into the affairs of private business and "burns the whole orchard" when there are just a few bad apples.
Government officials are terrified of offending a few specific individuals, so they treat everyone equally. They offend everybody and treat everyone equally - badly!
Again, if there are only a few bad guys. and the proposed inspection program is only intended to bring substandard rental units up to par, why not inspect the units known to be problems and go after them? Then, on a courtesy basis, at a time mutually convenient for tenant and landlord, inspect the other units - perhaps on a seven- or 10-year schedule.
Tell the landlord what, if anything, is wrong and give him reasonable time to correct the deficiencies - a short time for major deficiencies or a long time for minor ones. If the units are of good quality and the landlord is in the majority that are reputable, give him a seven- or 10-year certificate for the property - and leave him alone.
We still have the city hot line for whistle blowers to identify special and critical problems. The names of whistle blowers should be recorded to identify the chronic complainers, and the whistle blower should be charged for the inspection if no problems are found or the alarm was frivolous.
It seems Roanoke city is stampeding into a new round of creeping bureaucracy because it didn't have a policy in the past. Officials are overreacting to make up for past failures and to prove that they care about those unfortunate five who died in the fire. No one knows for sure whether smoke detectors would have made a difference.
I agree that the city has been lax, and we probably need a policy. But what appears to me to be a substantial overreaction is unwarranted. Let's inject a note of sanity into this whole mess.
Vernon M. Danielsen of Roanoke is an engineer with a local architectural firm and co-owner of rental property.
LENGTH: Medium: 56 linesby CNB