Another benefit of civilization and government

A recent Boston Globe article about a small town in Alaska (also described elsewhere as the state's 4th or 6th largest city, depending on whether one accepted a population figure of something like 6,000 or another estimate of 8,000) mentioned that as recently as the past decade, it had no building codes, and that its mayor seemed to be quite proud of that during her tenure. 

It seems to me that building codes and their enforcement by inspectors during the construction process are one of the very worthwhile protections that increasing population density and civilization brings us.  If I am thinking about buying an improved property, I want assurance that it was properly built, that it was built to reasonable standards at the time.  I want it to be built to withstand earthquakes, if those are a known issue in the area, and hurricanes, if those are a real possibility locally.  I don't want to have to research the reputation and finances of the builder at the time he built the building, or take it on faith that all was done properly. 

DIvision of labor is a fine thing, and it seems worthwhile to me to have such services be part of what one pays for through user fees and local taxes on land value.

Until the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline a generation ago, Wasilla was little more than a general store at a corner of the Parks Highway. In 1984, the city began growing by 20 percent annually, one of the fastest rates in the country. Many were fleeing Anchorage, the energy-and-cargo hub that the writer John McPhee called a "condensed, instant Albuquerque." Disgruntled Alaskans - who saw land becoming both expensive and scarce - preferred "Los Anchorage."

An hour's drive to the north, Wasilla had few natural barriers to growth, and government did not add any hurdles. With no zoning or building code, a resident able to finance a house on his or her property could build without oversight. Despite the fact that the city sits in an earthquake zone with extreme weather conditions, Wasilla enforced no standards on building materials, methods, or dimensions - and no construction documents needed to be filed at city hall.

In return, government was truly hands-off: Most residents lived on gravel roads and off their own septic tanks. They paid no sales tax. State troopers were the only police presence. There was no trash collection and the only firefighters were volunteers. ...

"Governor Palin believes the rights of property owners must be respected, and adhered to that belief as she improved the city's infrastructure, public work projects, and business incentives that ultimately turned Wasilla into the region's economic hub," campaign spokeswoman Maria Comella said in a statement.

In her first year as mayor, Palin repeatedly signed ordinances to rezone lots for denser uses, often turning plots of land from "rural residential," the most restrictive category, to the looser "commercial."

Fearing that substandard construction on these new lots would undercut their members' work, the Mat-Su Homebuilders Association pushed the city to adopt building codes. In February 2007, Palin broke a 3-to-3 tie to defeat a proposed building-code ordinance in the council. When, in a nonbinding referendum later that year, voters joined her in rejecting the proposal, Palin called it "a good message sent." Homeowners who needed financing were already getting inspections because banks required them, Palin and her allies argued.

Those involved in planning issues at the time say they can recall no major instances where Wasilla used its regulatory power to limit a developer's plans. Michelle Church, a local planning advocate, recalls that when she left a planning commission meeting where a conditional-use permit for the Fred Meyer store was approved with only modest restrictions, she saw two company representatives in the lobby, laughing. "They couldn't believe the city didn't care what they did," she said.

 

Comments

[taxpayer]

"Homeowners who needed financing were already getting inspections because banks required them, Palin and her allies argued." And surely the banks knew what they were doing and wouldn't take unnecessary risks.