Syracuse community members raised concerns Wednesday about the city’s lead poisoning issue at a special meeting of the Common Council, as officials debated a proposed tenant inspection law.

Syracuse residents at the meeting called on the council to act after Councilor At-Large Khalid Bey and Councilor Joseph Carni, of the 1st district, said a plan to change the city’s rental registry requirements would not allow the city to inspect homes for lead paint.

“The damage that is done to children who have to live in these houses that are contaminated by poisonous lead paint is devastating,” said Jaime Howley, a South Side resident and member of Tomorrow’s Neighborhoods Today.

Current city law requires owners of rentals that house one or two families to obtain a rental registry certificate. The proposal being considered by the council would enable the city’s code enforcement inspectors to conduct interior inspections of such properties every two years, said Bey, who originally set forth the resolution.

Bey said the goal of the meeting was for the council “to come to some kind of agreement” about the proposed amendment.

There was confusion among councilors during the meeting about the current ability of code enforcement to perform interior inspections and what the amendment would change.

As the law now stands, code enforcement is able to send inspectors inside a one- or two- family rental only if the owner or tenant requests an inspection, said Ken Towsley, director of Syracuse’s code enforcement department.

If the owner refuses entry, code enforcement is able to petition a judge for a warrant based on a tenant’s claim that the building has code violations, Towsley said.

Steven Thompson, a councilor at-large, said he doubted that if the proposal is passed an owner’s refusal to allow inspectors inside the rental would be enough to prove probable cause to a judge.

“The proposed ordinance would establish a routine, periodic inspection, which, thereby, the council is stating the city’s interest in having the properties within the city inspected to prevent fiascos, such as fires or other disasters,” said Kim Morrell, a staff attorney at Legal Services of Central New York.

Morrell cited the 1967 Supreme Court case Camara v. Municipal Court as evidence for her legal opinion. In that case, the court ruled that San Francisco’s ordinance requiring routine, periodic inspections were enough to justify probable cause, she said.

“I know this is about more than lead, but I think a lot of people see it as a tool we can use to combat our lead problem in our homes,” said Councilor Susan Boyle, of the 3rd district.

Mary Traynor, though, also from Legal Services of Central New York, said the city would need an environmental impact study to allow for inspectors to enter homes to look for lead. After the study, the city would be able to pass a lead ordinance that would be used to conduct interior inspections based on the assumption of lead being present.

At present, code enforcement does not look for lead issues during inspections, Towsley said.

The council was unable to come to a decision on the amendment but is expected to discuss the issue at later meetings.

Published on February 7, 2018 at 9:53 pm

Contact Casey: casey@dailyorange.com | @caseydarnell_