Homelessness doesn’t go on hiatus, but family shelters do? Trying to find out why gihn.org is “closed temporarily.”

And:

This is why family shelter closed – Greensboro Homeless Program Temporarily Closing Due to Costs http://t.co/zwojJ9Y

From the linked article: “…the average homeless person is 9 years old, and there is a common misunderstanding that the homeless population consists of mostly adults.” True. The economy is hitting everybody hard. But it’s extra hard to see kids suffer.

Since RUCO began, there has been a dramatic decline in the number of violations. (See graph at Greensboro Housing Coalition’s web site.) But now, the future of this successful program is in jeopardy.

City Council member Nancy Vaughan has suggested that RUCO change from a mandatory program to self-report. (She has since seemed to be reconsidering her position.) Representatives from TREBIC (Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition) and the Greensboro Landlords Association would like to see RUCO abandoned. Housing advocates, such as Greensboro Housing Coalition and Greensboro Neighborhood Congress, fiercely oppose any changes.

City staff (Engineering & Inspections and Fire Department) also argue for keeping RUCO. The Greensboro Human Relations Commission has an interest in the outcome of the fight. Council member Robbie Perkins supports keeping the program. (source: Jordan Green)

Meanwhile, landlord Bill Burkley, who’s worked as a paid political consultant to some Council members, is appealing fines for code violations, and has just had his case continued before the advisory board which is pursuing the elimination of RUCO (source: Amanda Lehmert, via Fec) Five Council members who were contacted for a news story say they weren’t contacted or lobbied by Burkley.

I oppose self-report on code violations, because I know that some tenants won’t report, for fear of landlord retaliation, including losing their housing. Just recently, I’ve seen three examples of renters who fear retaliation and/or have already been retaliated against for reporting code violations. (Update: In all three cases, these were serious violations requiring immediate attention, that likely would have resulted in a 48-hour vacate notice, if not fixed within that time period.)

I could not obtain permission to share the stories of any of these renters. I was told: “Do not blog about this.” “Don’t tell anybody.” “You can’t say anything.” It’s frustrating, but their refusal to even allow me to share their stories anonymously proves the point that self-report doesn’t work. RUCO’s mandatory inspection system has been proved to work, by decreasing code violations markedly.

I understand why TREBIC and the Greensboro Landlords Association oppose RUCO. It forces landlords to meet code, levies fines for violations and prevents rental of units without certificates. In other words, it costs landlords money, and both those organizations represent landlords. But that doesn’t make their opposition right.

The worst part about the push to go to elimination of RUCO and self-report of violations is that it pits power and money (TREBIC, Greensboro Landlords Association) against poor people who are most likely to live in substandard housing and fear reporting housing code violations.  Power vs. poverty is an unfair fight. Too often, power wins. I’m hoping and praying that many advocates — and renters! — will step up and fight for the continuation of this successful program.

Be one of the voices in support of RUCO! Email Council members. Speak during the public comment period at a Council meeting. Write a letter to the editor — News & Record, YES! Weekly, Rhino Times. Blog, Facebook, Twitter. Say something!

Also posted at CaraMichele.com

UPDATED, 08/28/10: My landlord friends tell me via the comments below, and in private conversations, that the power vs. poverty analogy is not accurate.  I’m still listening. Meanwhile, there’s more.