H1134, the bill to help North Carolina Counties remove their abandoned mobile homes, has reached a stage where many legislators feel compelled to shape it before it becomes law. This is good. It means that the bill has legs and that it will probably be enacted in some form.

The bill is sponsored by Phillip Haire (Jackson-D) with Lucy Allen (Franklin-D), Joe Tolson (Edgecombe-D), Carolyn Justice (Pender-R). It is not a coincidence that each comes from one of our state’s rural areas. This issue is most severe in rural counties. Moreover, the funding that the bill provides matters because many of these counties are strapped by a lack of revenue and steadily increasing Medicaid costs.

A lot happened on Thursday.

In House Finance, the bill was amended by Rep. Julia Howard (Mocksville-R) to include abandoned mobile classrooms.

There was much debate, led mainly be Rep. Bill Daughtridge (R-Rocky Mount) and Rep. Curtis Blackwood (R-Matthews), to exempt property owners who were not rightful owners of the abandoned home in question from being sued by the county for removal of the mobile home in question; an amendment to this effect was also adopted.

The Solid Waste Management Fund, from which the monies to fund the grants in this bill will be drawn had roughly $1,000,000 in revenue and $1,000,000 in expenditures this year. However, the landfill tipping fee surcharge enacted last year, which will expand the revenue base of the Fund, has not kicked in yet, and in fact, a bill to delay the tip fee start date (H2541) has passed House Finance. Rep. Haire said he would offer an amendment that would align the effective date of this bill with that of the effective date of the landfill tipping fee.

The decision to strip out the liability clause may be a big deal.  Certainly, it removes some of the “stick” that counties have in their efforts to clean up the homes.  It can be a problem getting an absentee landowner to pay attention to this problem.  That is especially the case when a land owner is actually a mortgage company or servicer based out of a P.O. Box in New York.  County code enforcement officers are limited in their ability to accomplish anything across state lines.

The successful programs in Brunswick and Scotland Counties both have these liability provisions.  However, in the case of Brunswick, it hasn’t been necessary to use that rule very often.  They have managed to remove more than 1200 homes with a program that is almost entirely based upon the voluntary consent of land owners.

In the last days of this year’s short session, the problem of abandoned mobile homes has been the subject of an active discussion in the NCGA.

Philip Haire, a House member from Haywood County and chair of the Appropriations Committee, has again advanced his bill (H1134) to provide a means for governments to clean up their abandoned mobile homes. This is the fourth year that some iteration of the bill has existed.

This year’s version provides counties with up to $1000 in cost refunds for every home that they can clear. In Tier One Counties, agencies can apply for 50 percent of costs beyond $1000. Counties must have a plan for their disposal.

On Tuesday, the bill was discussed in the Environment committee.

In years past, a sticking point for this bill was the cost associated with funding the cleanup. It comes from a $300 per unit recovery charge on the sale of new or used homes. For doublewides, the cost is $600. This was not so much the focus of this year’s debate. Instead, counties wanted assurances that the program would remain voluntary. The industry remains opposed, in part on the principle that they do not believe that their products are disposable.

I visited with code enforcement officers in the Lumber River area on Tuesday. This group wants a solution to abandoned homes. They drive by abandoned homes to get to work, they see them as an obstacle to tourism and economic development, and they link the empty buildings with crime. Its a strongly felt problem.

Actually, the room had a few more people than just code enforcement.  There was a fair share of planners, community development non-profit types, and a few city managers.  What was interesting was the degree to which dealing with abandoned homes superseded any interest in innovations to redevelop parks.  ‘Fix the problem out back’, they seemed to be saying, ‘before we try any experiments with co-ops and land trusts.’