Like it or not, the city’s lead law will take effect July 1.

The legislation, which passed six months ago, requires all
city rental housing built before 1978 to be tested for lead hazards, such as
deteriorated paint and airborne lead particles. “Childhood lead poisoning is
one of the most common and preventable pediatric health problems in the United
States today,” city officials wrote in a
14-page document outlining what the law entails, why it is necessary, and
evaluation measures.

But the law remains controversial, especially among some
landlords who say remediation costs will bankrupt them. One of the hardest
things about her new job, says the city’s Neighborhood Empowerment Team
director, Molly Clifford, is telling landlords that the law is here to stay.
Clifford, whose agency will oversee the program, says her main focus now is
preparing landlords for what to expect in the coming months. By June 1, she says,
the city will have created a lead hotline, 428-LEAD, and website.

The people immediately affected will be landlords whose Certificates
of Occupancy — verifying that a rental unit is habitable — are up for
renewal this summer. (Previously, C of O’s were required every five years, but
starting next year, state law requires landlords to get certificates renewed
every three years). The law also mandates that the city inspect properties
following a tenant complaint.

While most landlords will only have to pass a visual
inspection, those in designated high-risk areas in Rochester’s
inner city must pass a more stringent dust-wipe test if they fail the visual
inspection. That’s where the health department found children with the highest
levels of lead in their blood, Clifford says.

Many landlords will take a financial hit, she acknowledges,
but the city has hesitated to place a price tag on remediation costs. There are
too many variables, Clifford says: “How big is the property? Are they doing the
work themselves or not? What’s the extent of the risk? Is it a little bit of
peeling paint, or is it full blown?”

Clifford says the city
hopes most tenants can remain in their home during the cleanup. “The
legislation actually outlines the requirements for what a property owner or
contractor would have to do,” she says. “They have to seal off the area that’s
being worked on. There has to be access to the kitchen, bathroom, whatever,”
she says. If tenants have to relocate, however, landlords must bear the cost.
That financial burden shifts to the county if a tenant receives a DSS shelter
allowance.

Clifford says inspectors
will work with landlords to come up with an appropriate remediation schedule.
“We’re not going to come right out and slap them with immediate fines,”
Clifford says. “If there are problems, if there are significant lead risks, and
the landlord does not appear to be helping, then we will obviously take
enforcement action.”

There is some funding available for landlords, Clifford
says. The city has about $10 million in grant money available to both eligible
landlords and homeowners. The city has also requested $2 million dollars in
federal aid, and hope to receive an answer sometime this fall. And on a visit
to Rochester earlier this year, Senator
Hillary Clinton proposed tax breaks for property owners to help offset lead
remediation costs.

Clifford encourages landlords to attend a free eight-hour
course that teaches safe lead-cleanup practices. It is being offered by various
agencies throughout the region. That way, she says, landlords can save money by
cleaning up their own properties and forgoing the cost of a contractor. There
is a catch, however, for landlords who clean up their properties after failing
the inspection.

“We do the initial inspection,” says Clifford. “We do the
lead wipes, but once they’ve had the work done, they need to have an
independent inspection saying, ‘Yes, this property is lead safe.’ And they have
to pay for that. And you will hear estimates from $150 to $500 per inspection.”

Clifford spends much of her time
reassuring those critical of the legislation that while the law is fixed, its
components could be revised. During the first year, city officials will monitor
the impact of the plan. That will include assessment of the impact on children
and on the city’s housing stock.

Like many, Clifford and other
city officials are concerned that costly cleanups might prompt some landlords
to abandon their properties. Already, about 11 percent of the city’s houses are
vacant.

But Clifford says lead
remediation might help Rochester’s
ailing housing market. “We do believe that in the long run, given that we’re
bringing improvements to our housing stock, there will be some improvement in
the overall housing conditions,” she says. “There may be people who are
operating sort of on the fringes who may not be keeping up their properties
now, and if this forces them out of the market — I mean, that’s not necessarily
a good thing, but it may lead to the opportunity for some other property owners
who have more resources to come in and take better care of the properties.”

This article appears in May 31 – Jun 6, 2006.