Township defends building actions
The Michigan Bureau of Construction Codes has recommended Almont Township’s code enforcement authority be withdrawn.
The decision was made at a state hearing Jan. 10 in Lansing where local residents testified in front of the bureau and the state’s Construction Code Commission.
The same residents have been vocal at township meetings, criticizing the performance of former building inspector Paul Wilcox, who they say he didn’t inspect their homes properly. Within days of the hearing, the township filed an appeal, said township attorney Eric Knuth, who said the township still has code authority on an interim basis while the appeal is pending.
An administrative law hearing now will be held before bureau. That session hasn’t been set yet.
“What we do now is schedule a meeting with the Bureau of Construction Codes to reevaluate our building department, looking at changes we have made since we installed a new building inspector and new building official, and see if we have implemented the changes they had recommended and be able to get authority back,” Knuth said.
In November, Wilcox resigned from his building inspector position. The Almont fire chief, he also remains the building inspector for the Village of Almont and Imlay Township. Since his resignation, the township hired Joseph Israel as the building inspector, and his brother Tim as building official.
In a July report written by Henry L. Green, director of the bureau of construction codes and fire safety, areas of concern included bookkeeping and serious inspection issues. Township Supervisor Gary Groesbeck said the township received a letter from the Construction Code Commission Dec. 1 stating it would have 90 days to implement changes.
However, a couple weeks later, another letter was sent stating recommendation to withdraw the township’s code enforcement.
“I’m not sure what caused that,” Groesbeck said. “I really don’t know what the state is going to do. They’re telling us they will work this out with us. I hope that they do. “I think we have a couple of gentleman here that are doing a great job. We’ve done nothing but adhere to what the state Construction Code Commission has been asking us to do.”
When it comes to taking responsibility, both sides have their minds set.
“One of the primary problems is that the responsible party in the end is the builder,” Knuth said. “If we assume that the inspector missed something, the builder has an obligation to make the building sufficient to satisfy the code. That seems to be getting lost in the shuffle here.”
Some residents have already taken action against their builders.
Patrick Smylie won a small claims court judgment for his Hollow Corners Road brick ranch. Although repairs were made, water began seeping back into his home three months later. Dryden Road residents Joe and Nancy Moskwa received judgment of $6,000 from their builder for having improperly installed insulation. Kathryn Bock said she has yet to have any of the issues she has with her home inspected by state employees. She also plans to go into mediation with her builder before pursuing litigation.
Smylie reported he has been dealing with water retention issues this winter as above ground pipes that carry water away from the home have frozen. He has contacted the township about continuing issues but doesn’t expect much help, citing past dealings with Groesbeck.
“He doesn’t take this seriously at all and meanwhile I have to live in this crap,” he said, adding he has been told by the supervisor not to attend township board meetings or come to the township hall during regular business hours without an attorney present.
Bock feels Wilcox improperly inspected her home, which she moved into December 2004 after her previous home burned down. She has been dealing with grade and cement issues since taking possession of her new house.
“If the building inspector of the township says ‘it’s okay,’ then the builder will think it’s okay,” Bock argues.
Groesbeck disagrees, saying the township hires builders and inspectors who are all licensed through the state’s bureau of construction code.
“We’re making an assumption that the building inspector is doing a correct job,” he said. “The state is telling us that the inspector has erred. That inspector is licensed through the state of Michigan, not the township board.”
Wilcox is also under investigation from the state, confirmed Mark Cisco, deputy director with the state bureau of construction codes. Wilcox, who stated when reached he was unaware of the investigation, said he hasn’t been in communication with Lansing since he got his licensed renewed in September. He feels the inspections he performed were done correctly, adding his reputation has been unfairly sullied as a result of the claims against him and the township.
“I can’t be responsible for what happened to a house four to five years down the road,” he said. “I’m responsible for what is there when I do my final inspection. I think (the residents’) biggest goal in life is to destroy me as badly as they can,” he said.
