For the purposes of explaining “power” for a code official, I would like to start by discussing conflict in the regulatory code environment. I will operate from the assumption that “conflict” encountered by code regulators is simply an alternate or opposing view by an individual (or organization) that produces different outcomes affecting a person or a group of people (i.e. the resident versus the city) hence, a “power” struggle.

According to the book entitled “Interpersonal Conflict” by Wilmont & Hocker “ All conflicts at some level hinge upon the fact that people perceive that there are incompatible goals held by a person (or organization) that is interfering with what the other person wants.” For code regulators, that basically means we encounter some residents (or business owners) that have beliefs systems which give meaning to their lives, and when we come to enforce the code, we impose a perceived incompatible belief system that is a threat to their survival.  

So why does managing the relationship of conflict and power even matter?

Well, if power is the ability to affect or influence; it is a good idea to leverage techniques that will assuage a resident’s anxiety. With power, people follow you by their own will–a person can possess a great deal of power and absolutely no authority to do anything.

According to Wilmont & Hocker “ People feel passionately about power—who has it, who ought to have more or less, how people misuse power, and how justified they feel in trying to gain more power for themselves.” Managing your relationship of conflict and power can be addressed in many ways, and the technique used to resolve it heavily depends on the situation. Some people often try to avoid conflict or pretend that it does not exist when enforcing codes, but when making decisions as a state or local authority, one must highly consider opposing views and the potential impact “power” of your decisions.

About the author:  Marcus Kellum, MMPA CCEA

Marcus Kellum has worked with local governments, private businesses, and professional organizations across the country to train their regulatory, compliance and enforcement officers and inspectors. He spent nearly three decades in public service working with various cities and counties in Georgia, Colorado, and the City of New York. He has held positions as code division manager, chief of enforcement, and department director. Marcus is a Certified Code Enforcement Administrator and holds a BS in criminal justice administration, and a master’s degree in management and public administration.  

If your community’s comprehensive plan includes neighborhood preservation and redevelopment, or your company’s business plan creates a quality of place for residents; retooling your current delivery of these services is a priority. A new approach will allow greater opportunity to utilize your business to help restore neighborhoods throughout the community you serve and address key issues pertaining to building, zoning, regulatory enforcement, lodging, operations, property maintenance, and management.

Metric One Training and Consulting can provide your community or business with a new approach that would not only meet immediate citizen and policy concerns but would create a system of service delivery that will result in greater effectiveness and improved business performance. In addition, staff will be trained on best new practices and service delivery techniques and concepts.

A more efficient approach allows for greater flexibility and provides increased operational efficiency and greater customer service. Eliminating redundancies in business operations and ensuring that existing resources are available to provide a wide range of services at a higher rate of speed will increase public confidence in both the residential and business and communities.  

Change is a fundamental component of continuous quality improvement. Any improvement methodology involves introducing change and measuring its impact. Public service and private business operation under Metric One’s delivery strategy will create a streamlined effort that will redefine service delivery and make each function stronger and more effective.

Contact us today for a free quote or for a detailed list of service offerings

MetricOne2018@gmail.com
(470) 588-7144

If there is any legal concept or practice that is helpful to regulatory inspectors and officers is the Plain View Doctrine. Basically, under the plain view doctrine, if code officials are lawfully in a position from which they view an object, if it is visibly a violation of the locally adopted code or ordinance, they may issue official warnings, notices of violation or citations regarding the violation without a warrant.

Generally, unless one of the warrant exceptions applies, most regulatory/government officials need a search warrant before they can search a home, or business for violations. A search (or inspection) that is made without a warrant, or in violation of a warrant, is considered an unreasonable search, so the plain view doctrine is a tool for regulators to use if the violation can be seen without entry or search.

It is important to note that Consent is when a resident, or business owner give consent to an inspection. The consent must be given freely and voluntarily, and the person must be an individual who would otherwise normally expect the area being searched to be private (not the underage child of the property owner).

Violations in plain view may be addressed by the code officer

If the regulator, during a routine inspection or in response to a complaint (depending on your local policy) happen to notice “illegal items or activity”(i.e. junk vehicle, working without a permit, evidence of overcrowding) left out in plain sight, they are normally permitted to pursue actions that are authorized by state and local law.

It is important for officers and inspectors to consider the totality of their actions based on the circumstances of the encounter on the field. In other words, exercise good judgement when using your enforcement authority.  When moving forward with any enforcement activity, code officers and inspectors should be sure to:

1. Know the limits of your authority (if you do not have the authority, do not make threats or promises)
2. Be in a place you have a right to be (standing in the right-of way, or any other legal vantage point)
3. Inspect for conditions that violate the code, and refer those conditions outside of your scope to those who have the authority   

About the Author: Marcus Kellum is a training and management professional with Metric One Training & Consulting based in Atlanta, GA. For over 10 years, Marcus has worked with local governments, private businesses and professional organizations to train their regulatory, compliance and enforcement officers and inspectors. He spent nearly three decades in public service working with various cities and counties. He has held positions such as code division manager, chief of enforcement, and department director. Marcus is a certified code enforcement administrator, property maintenance and housing inspector and has a Master’s degree in Management and Public Administration and a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice.

Never has local government leaders been challenged to perform as much as they have since the COVID 19 pandemic affected their economy and their community. Coronavirus has, in many communities, inspired new industries, created new careers, and revealed incompetence of many local government leaders across the nation.

These local governments face a complex and challenging future and will be responsible for developing a new tech sensitive and transparent approach to governance (and local leadership) that caters to the priorities of all community groups. This is the newly realized local leader in government, and these skills will be necessary to succeed in this post “new world”. This shift must happen in all aspects of local government services including community development, regulatory compliance, public works and public safety. By developing new strategic goals, changing public service delivery and “leaping forward” in operational effectiveness a new age in governing will emerge.

“Restorative Management” within local government is the key, and communities will have to hold their leadership responsible to choose effective governance over the potential desire of negative self-interest. Realistically, positive self- interest can be an incentive for local government administrators with career concerns in mind. This positive self-interest can be reflected in the way by which management applies their efforts; this exemplifies their self-interest in their role. Effective local governance is efficiency in the practices and procedures that maximize community safety and economic performance, and the local administrator’s self-interest should fuel this process. Effective and responsible governance provides a structure that works for the benefit of everyone concerned by ensuring that the organization adheres to community needs, ethical standards and newly developed best practices, yet negative self-destructing self interest costs lives.

About the author: Marcus Kellum, MMPA CCEA
Marcus Kellum has worked with local governments, private businesses and professional organizations across the country to train their regulatory, compliance and enforcement officers and inspectors. He spent nearly three decades in public service working with various cities and counties in Georgia, Colorado and the City of New York. He has held positions as code division manager, chief of enforcement, and department director. Marcus is a Certified Code Enforcement Administrator and holds a BS in criminal justice administration, and a master’s degree in management and public administration.

Can you ever be ethical and moral and follow the law at the same time?

Ethics and morals relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. While they are sometimes used interchangeably, they are different, especially as they relate to code enforcement, building inspection and all other forms of regulatory enforcement. How many code officials are required to enforce rules and regulations that they do not fundamentally agree with? Instead of considering the needs of the resident, interjecting common sense into the matter, taking on a bit of personal risk on behalf of an individual and making a simple accommodation; should you just stick to the code?

Before I open that can of worms, let us clearly define some terms.

As aforementioned, ethics and morals relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. Ethics however refers to rules provided by an external source (i.e. workplace rules), and laws of course have “enforcing authority” derived from the state or local jurisdiction (like property maintenance and building codes). A person‘s morals however refer to that individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.

Morals and Law differ because the law demands an absolute subjection to its rules and commands; so is following the rules the safest option?

MetricOne Training and Consulting offers this class and other courses which are designed to explore these concepts in a regulatory environment, and help officers and inspectors develop practices to stay abreast of the right and wrong things to do during their daily workday.

If you are interested in the next time this course is being offered, please CLICK HERE

Please leave a comment below if you agree with the statement: “The Rules are the Rules”

One of the key principles of the standards known as GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures) is the consistency principle. The GAAP consistency principle states that when a business has fixed a method for the accounting treatment of an item, it will enter all similar items in the exact same way in the future. Can code enforcement officers adopt a similar approach to enforcement activities?

The oxford dictionary defines consistency as “conformity in the application of something, typically that which is necessary for the sake of logic, accuracy, or fairness….The achievement of a level of performance that does not vary greatly in quality over time”; so for the purposes of this writing, I will use the working description of officer consistency (as it relates to code enforcement) as someone who handles similar situations in the same way, has the same attitudes towards people or things, or achieves the same level of success in resolving issues. With that said, is this practice productive in the regulatory code enforcement arena?

Should the community you serve expect a level of consistency from you and your code enforcement team? Should you be consistent in the quality of your work, in your reliability as a regulator and in completing (or following up) on the tasks you commit to?

Your answer should be a resounding yes!

For public service, especially regulatory enforcement, consistency is especially important. Just like a visit to your favorite restaurant results in the expectation of the same good food all the time, consistency builds reputations. In the case of enforcement, residents expect the same standards. Years of field work has shown me that each individual interaction (or each case) may be different, but the last thing people want is to be treated different than their neighbor– they want a certain level of predictability (the city gives everyone 10 days to cut their grass).  As a regulator, how do you measure your level of effectiveness if what you are measuring isn’t performed consistently?

Lastly, if you want the community you serve to know that you are serious about compliance, establishing and maintaining a level of consistency maintains your message. In other words, the best enforcement efforts will fail without a dedication to consistency.

About the Author:  Marcus Kellum, MMPA CCEA

Marcus Kellum has worked with local governments, private businesses and professional organizations across the country to train their regulatory, compliance and enforcement officers and inspectors. He spent nearly three decades in public service working with various cities and counties in Georgia, Colorado and the City of New York. He has held positions as code division manager, chief of enforcement, and department director. Marcus is a Certified Code Enforcement Administrator and holds a BS in criminal justice administration, and a master’s degree in management and public administration.

Code enforcement fairness and effectiveness depends upon community respect and confidence in local government. Community cooperation with code enforcement is a product of its trust that officers will act honestly and the officer, as the public’s initial contact with the enforcement of codes and regulatory standards, must act in a manner that instills such trust. It is really all about integrity, fairness, consistency and impartiality. A program with proper leadership and dedicated staff allows these qualities to be the basis of their efforts.

As a regulator, you should be able to effectively determine a customers (resident) underlying need beyond that which is obvious or initially expressed, and proactively communicate methods to work towards compliance. Regardless of whether the resident lives in a hotel, an apartment, or in a single-family home; people deserve respect and have a right to proper living conditions in all cases. The municipality that is committed to regulatory compliance will be able to control the quality of life of the residents with an effective program that enforces codes and standards.