A Triumph for Housing Safety

In 1996, just days before Christmas morning, five children, ages 1 to 9, died when fire swept through their makeshift home, a converted garage on East 105th Street in South Los Angeles. Three months later, a grandmother and two small children died in a similar garage fire in Arleta. In response, representatives of municipal agencies ran for political cover, claiming that local government did not have enough inspectors to prevent such disasters.

Last month, Mayor Richard Riordan signed into law an $8-million program that will routinize periodic inspections of all rental properties in the city containing two or more dwelling units. Many housing advocates, accustomed to disappointment, were surprised at the relatively speedy adoption of the ordinance. What had happened since the 1996-97 garage fires? Why is the city suddenly so concerned about rental housing?

The deadly fires in Watts and Arleta certainly weren’t the first signs of dangerous living conditions in the city. Similar fires had occurred with some frequency in Westlake and Pico Union. Indeed, the statistics on residential conditions were well-known. According to the 1995 American Housing Survey of the U.S. Census, of the approximately 700,000 rental-housing units in Los Angeles, more than 50,000 had rats in the prior three months, nearly 100,000 had leaks in the previous 12 months and approximately 26,000 units had exposed electrical wiring.

In many L.A. neighborhoods, residential decline has been going on for decades. The decay generally began soon after initial occupancy, especially in the shoddily constructed apartment buildings of the 1960s and ‘70s. Research from the UCLA Community Outreach Partnership Center indicates a strong correlation exists between housing deterioration and such factors as property-tax delinquencies, unpaid utility bills and mortgage defaults. Put another way, ignorance is no excuse for municipal neglect.

Impetus for the new inspection program came from the Blue Ribbon Citizens Committee on Slum Housing. A series of committee reports detailed the obstacles to filing complaints about dangerous housing conditions and the low probability that any appropriate--and coordinated--public action would be taken to eliminate a risk.

In parallel with this work, the UCLA School of Public Policy and Social Research helped establish the Neighborhood Knowledge Los Angeles (NKLA) public-information project (https://nkla.sppsr.ucla.edu), which made pinpointing residential deterioration and disinvestment easier. With funding from the city Housing Department and the Department of Commerce, NKLA’s primary aim was to help neighborhoods identify their own problem properties. However, because the City Council and local government agencies had difficulty accessing their own internal information, they became the primary users of the NKLA warning system. Officials quickly learned that housing deterioration is not confined to a few inner-city areas but is ubiquitous.

As important as the committee’s and City Council’s leadership were, a political development probably sealed the case for a more ambitious housing-inspection program: the rise in Latino electoral participation. Since many Latino families depend on the low-paying, nonunionized, light-manufacturing economy for their livelihoods, they struggle to earn the monthly rent. Sometimes, they are forced to double up to put a roof over their heads. Accordingly, these families have a strong interest in securing safe rental dwellings. The ballot box is one way to drive home this point. Organizing through the church is another. It is surely no coincidence that the blue-ribbon committee was chaired by Father Donald Merrifield of Loyola Marymount University and included Sister Diane Donoghue, who also directs one of the city’s most successful nonprofit housing-development groups, “Esperanza” (“Hope”).

Yet, passing an ordinance is easy compared with implementing it. Before victory over neighborhood decay can be declared, a number of challenges must be overcome.

* The first of possibly several lawsuits from landlord groups seeking to block implementation of the new inspection program has been filed. This is unfortunate, because the majority of rental property owners are responsible and do not acquire real estate to exploit the vulnerability of their renters. Most of the slum-housing problem is traceable to a group of property owners dubbed “The 40 Thieves” by prosecutors.

* With support from the Fannie Mae House L.A. Partnership, a consortium of lenders will provide $150 million to upgrade deteriorated rental housing. While an important first step, this money is a drop in the bucket, especially since the funds have not been matched by any increase in city money to reduce overall interest rates, ensure housing affordability and thereby prevent tenant displacement.

* Historically, the city has found it easier to disavow knowledge of specific dangerous housing conditions than take responsibility for correcting them. Under the new program, when responsible owners are informed of problems, repairs will be made on a timely basis. But what about instances when the owner balks and occupants face significant health risks? A placard with an A, B, or C rating, posted in a window, won’t suffice.

If we conclude, because of the new inspection program, that renters, rather than homeowners, now have the upper hand in Los Angeles, we should recall the garage fires in Watts and Arleta. Under the new ordinance, such hazardous properties are still likely to be overlooked by city inspectors, because the garages were part of single-family homes and thus not covered by the ordinance. Still, a historic step has been taken with the adoption of the city’s new inspection program, but much more work is required if all residents are to have safe homes.