DATE: Sunday, November 2, 1997              TAG: 9710310226

SECTION: SUFFOLK SUN             PAGE: 02   EDITION: FINAL 

COLUMN: FOCAL POINT 

SOURCE: John Pruitt 

                                            LENGTH:   64 lines

THE SYSTEM'S A BIG PART OF THE PROBLEM

A city housing inspector came to my door the other day, dispatched because someone had complained about my house.

What, exactly, did they complain about? Well, nothing exactly.

He supposed it was a matter of minimum housing standards, but he was surprised that he'd been sent to a private residence. Most calls involve rental housing.

This is not a complaint about either the inspector or his visit. Old houses like ours require a lot of care, and I won't quarrel with anyone who thinks mine needs additional attention.

The inspector, as polite as he could be, made a good impression. If we had to have such a visit, it was nice that such a pleasant person had come.

My complaint is with the way the system works - or, to my mind, the way it doesn't work.

The worker came simply because it was required by his job, but he hadn't been equipped with knowledge of what the visit was all about.

Thus he was put in the position of saying, in essence, ``Do you mind if I look around to see if I can find a problem to justify my presence here?''

That's about as effective a use of a city employee's time as a carpenter's sending his naive helper for a board stretcher or left handed chisel.

City policy put this man in the position of playing a guessing game minus instructions.

In a city with so many obvious housing problems, this man's time was spent on finding out if there was an unspecified problem at a private residence.

If I'm going to fix the problem - if there even was one - I suppose I'll be told at some point what it is I'm to work on. That hasn't happened yet.

This is no way to run a city. And it's certainly not my job to point a housing inspector in the way of trouble on my own property.

The essential point here is that it's our property, and we live in it. We're hardly in the business of bringing down a neighborhood that we cherish.

While I've never subscribed to the notion that an owner should be able to do as he darn well pleases on his property, neighbors aside, I do question the value of sending city employees on wild goose chases. Especially when my tax dollars help pay for the misadventure.

There are just too many real housing problems waiting to be addressed. Many are within sight or walking distance of City Hall.

It's the way of the system, though. For years, Suffolk has had the asinine policy of inspections based on complaints.

That means the owner of a dilapidated house that gives the neighborhood heartburn can go untouched by the city unless someone tells inspectors who drive by it routinely that it's a problem.

How on earth Suffolk ever hopes to upgrade its housing stock while holding to this policy of hear no evil, see no evil escapes me.

There's a difference between home owners who choose to live with a leaky porch roof and know that they're in no danger and renters who must live with danger because property owners choose to ignore their obligation to provide safe residences.

That's why so many complaints about rental homes originate with owners of nearby private residences. Some poor renters, fearful of being put out, are not about to complain about even the worst conditions.

Still, there are private homes that merit complaint. When a pig sty of a house threatens to make the whole neighborhood stink, I think it only right for neighbors - or others who just happen to care about what's happening in Suffolk - to complain.

I won't hesitate to call, and I hope you won't either.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu