Fire/Code Inspections Task Force — Portland, ME
Date: 2015-01-26

Fire and Building Code Task Force
 January 26, 2015
 2:30-4:00 pm, rm 209, City Hall



 AGENDA


1. Welcome

2. Overview of State Fire Marshal’s report re Noyes Street and discussion of relevant items for

 task force consideration
3. Discuss technology, internal training, staffing

4. Next steps:

 a. Thurs 1/29 2:30-4, rm 209. Finalize recommendations for Council PSHHS Committee

 b. Tues 2/3, 5:30-7:00 pm, rm 24. Public meeting

 c. Tues 2/10, 5:30 pm, Council Chambers. Presentation to Council PSHHS Committee

Fire/Code Inspections Task Force
 Meeting Notes
 January 26, 2015

Phase 2 Task Force Members:
Julie Gregor, Inspection Supervisor – Portland Housing Authority
Katie McGovern, Tenant Advocate – Pine Tree Legal Assistance
Crandall Toothaker – Southern Maine Landlord Association
Brit Vitalius for Carleton Winslow – Southern Maine Landlord Association
Rich Bianculli, Neighborhood Prosecutor, Police Dept - City of Portland
Adam Lee, Attorney, Corporation Counsel – City of Portland
Jay Fleming, Deputy Chief - Boston Fire Dept (not present)
Keith Gautreau, Assistant Chief, Fire Dept - City of Portland
Tammy Munson, Inspections Division Director - City of Portland
Tuck O’Brien, Chair, Portland Planning Board (not present)
Jon Rioux, Inspections Division Deputy Director - City of Portland
Julie Sullivan, Acting Chief of Staff - City of Portland

 1. Welcome
 2. Overview of State Fire Marshal’s report re Noyes Street and discussion of relevant items for
 task force consideration
 What does this tell us – what should we add or change in what we’ve already been
 discussing?
 a. Origin and cause: Outside on porch, Improperly discarded smoking materials (cigarettes),
 Improper use of cigarette receptacle, Fuel load on porch, Time of day (undetected)
 i. Smoking is the leading cause for fatal fires.
 ii. Can charge tenants for disconnecting smoke detectors – could even become
 criminal mischief charge if done repeatedly.
 1. Could be grounds to evict because endangering other tenants
 2. Landlords could put this in their leases
 b. Human behavior elements: Smoke alarms removed, Blocked egress, Drinking and
 smoking, Housekeeping issues
 i. Need to educate landlords about the different kinds of smoke alarms – eg, don’t
 use an ionization smoke detector near a kitchen or bathroom, use photoelectric.
 c. Arrangement/legal use of building
 i. Discussed the need to ensure inspection of 2-unit rental properties – some are
 very large, with numerous bedrooms.


 Page 1 of 4
 ii. Concluded that square footage and number of bedrooms should be risk factors
 for prioritization. This information could be added to the annual landlord
 registration form to ensure that the City has complete and accurate information
 (currently we have this information from the Assessor’s Office).
 iii. Consider changing the code in Section 10-3(m) to say OR subject of complaint.
 iv. Discussed lodging houses/rooming houses. Licensing should not be done
 through City Clerk but through registration and required annual inspection.
 1. Need clarification on how tenants are removed – whether the landlord is
 viewed as an innkeeper; different rules.
 d. State Fire Marshal inspects all fatal fires. They are forwarded their findings to the DA,
 which is why the full report cannot be made public at this time. Also, the ATF has
 corroborated the Portland Fire Department and the State Fire Marshal’s theory and
 findings.
 e. The findings tell us that education is key – the importance of keeping egress unblocked,
 working smoke detectors, disposal of smoking materials.
 i. Revisited the proposed new document for tenants and landlords to sign – should
 be done with a walk-through of the unit to test that smoke detectors are
 connected and working.
 ii. Discussed the enforcement of this and concluded that it is an excellent education
 tool and the City can enforce when inspecting by asking to see the jointly signed
 document.
 f. The findings also underscore the importance of enforcement of working smoke
 detectors, removal of trash.
 i. Discussed Heavy Item Pickup (HIP) and whether that would make an impact on
 the factors that were causal. Task Force believes that reinstating HIP would not
 make enough of a difference; this demographic is more likely to keep old
 furniture.
 ii. Task Force also believes that banning couches on porches is also not a
 worthwhile option at this time because it would be more impactful to spend
 resources on education and enforcement for highest-risk properties.
 g. Portland Fire Department has already pulled a list of 67 properties recommended by
 USM for students and is prioritizing inspections there.
 i. Consider putting in the area around the university as a risk factor.
 ii. Consider changing zoning around USM to legalize rooming/lodging houses and
 ensure they have proper fire systems.
 iii. Perhaps there are more illegal third floor units than illegal rooming/lodging
 houses – also may require a zoning change.
 h. In the current City code, there are different definitions of rooming houses in Ch. 6 and
 Ch. 10. Need to tighten those up.
3. Discussion of enforcement, technology, internal training, staffing
 a. Finish enforcement discussion from last meeting

 Page 2 of 4
 i. Tenant notification – policy needs to be revisited and finalized. Was drafted after
 10 Exchange St issues to establish more stringent fines, and post so tenants are
 aware of the violations.
 ii. Discussed concerns that other subsidized housing are not well-monitored (most
 are under various HUD subsidies and inspected by other agencies)
b. Technology – With minimal to no new resources, the City can standardize and
 streamline inspection reporting processes. The PSS study noted the need for improved
 use of technology in the inspections functions.
 What else should the City consider for technological improvements?
 i. Fire Department will move to Urban Insight.
 ii. Develop and implement standardized checklists for inspectors to use in the field.
 These checklists should be shared with landlords and tenants through public
 education.
 iii. Consider having tablets for inspectors to use in the field, greatly diminishing the
 amount of time required to cite an owner for violations and follow up with
 enforcement.
 iv. Provide online capability for annual landlord registration.
 v. Everything needs to be online – starting with the landlord registration.
 vi. Should work to have a complete inventory of all rental properties in the city
c. Internal Training – The internal phase of this Task Force’s work illuminated several areas
 for improvement in staff training.
 Are there other opportunities for internal training?
 i. Inspectors across relevant departments require additional training and cross-
 training to improve inspections.
 ii. All relevant staff require additional training to use Urban Insight and to ensure
 thorough documentation of all inspections.
 iii. Other City staff who work in the field will be trained on the checklist so that they
 can easily report any concerns for follow up.
d. Staffing – PSS’ study used a metric to recommend 10 new FTEs in the Fire Department
 alone to ensure widespread inspections. We believe we can achieve the intended goal of
 improving our ability to ensure the safety of Portland’s rental housing stock using a
 different approach. In order to ensure implementation of these recommendations and to
 evaluate whether there are indeed ensuing improvements to the city’s rental housing
 stock, the following new positions are requested.
 i. Housing Safety Official (title TBD) who reports to the City Manager, convenes and
 coordinates all relevant departments to address issues with a property and
 decide actions to be taken.
 ii. Three additional inspectors, all cross-trained in building code and life safety code,
 who will report to the Housing Safety Official.
 iii. One administrative support position, who will coordinate the risk-based
 assessment of all rental properties and the online database, who also reports to
 the Housing Safety Official.
 iv. An Education Officer at the Fire Department to implement the additional training


 Page 3 of 4
 needed.
 v. Discussion:
 1. Inspecting GA-subsidized properties needs to move to new housing
 safety office
 2. This new housing safety office can be largely self-sustaining through
 registration fees
 e. Should these fees be levied by unit or by property?
 i. City has approx. 17-20,000 units in 6,900 buildings. Removing 3,284 residential
 condos leaves 3,616 properties.
 ii. $100/property annual fee makes the program close to self-sufficency
 iii. Lower annual fee plus significant penalty – how find balance
 iv. By unit seems too punitive, but may need to consider way to scale fee by
 size/complexity of property
 v. Landlords okay with $25/property with the revenue going to fund inspections
 vi. How “reward” landlords who are compliant
 vii. Raise reinspection fees
4. What’s next
 a. Thurs 1/29, 2:30-4:00 pm, rm 209 – discuss recommendations
 b. Tues 2/3, 5:30-7:00 pm, rm 24 – Public Meeting
 c. Weds 2/4 – Mon 2/9 – Virtual discussion of public meeting feedback
 d. Tues 2/10, 5:30 pm, Council Chambers – Presentation to City Council Public Safety,
 Health & Human Services Committee
 e. Weds 2/11 – Mon 2/16 – Virtual discussion of Committee meeting feedback
 f. Final recommendations issued




 Page 4 of 4