Public Policy
  Analysis, opinion & ideas from Steve Harry

Directory

About/Contact

City Development Office has another unhappy customer

November 18, 2020

Last month I wrote about a woman who'd participated in a home rehabilitation program administered by the City of Lansing's Development Office that left her with a house that was barely habitable. (See Botched roof replacement ruins Lansing home) That story caught the attention of a family that had a similar experience. In both cases, it was the same contractor: Frederickson Construction of Bath, Michigan. 

Mark Eagle and Jessica Madden, a young married couple, applied for the program in 2016. This email from Robin Edmondson, Interim Housing Rehabilitation Agent, was received September 22, 2016:

 

We’d like to schedule the closing for Wed., September 28th, 8:30 a.m.  Closings usually take 30-45 minutes, depending on questions you might have for the contractor and Waylon.  You will sign the Contract, Mortgage, Note, Project Agreements and the change order.  Bring your cashier check or money order in the amount of $3,351.70, made payable to the City of Lansing.   Attached is Change Order #1, detailing the items being removed from the specifications.  Look it over and if you have questions, please call before the closing.   Please confirm this time and date by email.

The original Proposal and Contract is 29 pages. At $80,250, the total cost was more than the couple wanted to take on, so several items were deleted. The Change Order is dated September 21, 2016. That cut the total cost to $56,851.70.

The work began in September 2016 and was completed in January 2017. Frederickson was to come back in the spring to reinstall a fence, seed the yard and put gutters back up on the garage. This letter says the Development Office inspected the work and the couple signed an acknowledgement that they were satisfied. The letter also explains the funding of the project. Total cost was $56,171.70. $10,000 came from a CBDG (HUD) grant, $13,500 from a Michigan Department of Health and Human Services grant through the Lead and Healthy Homes program, $3,351.70 paid by the couple, and a $29,320 loan. The loan was at 0% interest with deferred payment: "The loan may be forgiven over time, when requirements are met according to the mortgage agreement and note." The loan is through the City's Homeowner Rehabilitation Program.

No problems were reported until May 21, 2018 when Jessica emailed Barb Kimmel of the Development Office:

 

My name is Jessica Madden and I had rehab work performed on my home at 1417 Corbett Street Lansing, Michigan 48910 by Scott Fredrickson. I am writing to request assistance in addressing a roofing issue on our home which was also replaced under Scott Fredrickson. The roof shingles where the roof meets the wall of the house are heaving. I know that there is a warranty on the shingles per the contract however I have never received the specific warranty details. Based on the look of what is going on, either the shingles are faulty or the step flashing was installed incorrectly.  I have previously contacted Scott on another issue and received little to no response, therefore I kindly request to be contacted within 48 hours to remedy this situation or I will be filing a complaint with the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA).  I have attached pictures to show what I am referring to. You can see along the front of the house where the shingles are popping up as well as in the corner where the two walls meet. I thank you for your time in reading this and look forward to your response. Email would be the best way to reach me over the next few days as I will be traveling within the state.

Kimmel responded the same day:

 

I would like you to call Dennis Graham.  Dennis is a rehab specialist with our office, and he has many years of experience.  He can get right up there with a ladder and see up close, as there may be things that are not showing up in the photos that are concerning and need attention. . . . If there is a problem, we will work you and Scott Fredrickson to get things taken care of.  Thank you for reaching out.  A roof is a huge investment, and one of the most important protections your home has from damaging elements.  Its proper installation and long life are a top priority.

On June 8, Jessica emailed Matthew Schraft:

 

My name is Jessica Madden and we spoke earlier today regarding my request for assistance. In late fall 2016 we received a home rehabilitation loan from the City of Lansing Development office through state and federal funding.   As part of the project we had our roof replaced and the shingles are not layed correctly. I have been in contact with the City and was advised that I need to contact the contractor which I have done with little to no response. After the rehab specialist came out from the city he agreed that the shingles we not laying correctly and suggested the contractor apply tar and more nails.   Today, the crew came to make the repairs and upon inspecting my roof said the whole other side is the same way, it is a *expletive job and the whole area would need to be replaced. I told them I would be contacting the city and I did not want them to do anything at this time.   I have attached the pictures for reference and would appreciate any help.

Soon, another problem came up: a musty smell. Jessica emailed rehab construction specialist Dennis Graham on June 11:

 

When I made the call on the lead I was asking in general if there was a leak if it would damage lead work. There could very well be a leak as there is a musty smell coming from the exterior wall that I mentioned to you. Every time it rains or is humid, it smells very strongly. I did not say specfically that we are experiencing a leak at this time but I feel the need for it to be investigated given the issue we are having in regards to the roof and the musty smell which could be harmful to me and my family. This is especially true not only from the standpoint of a potential mold issue but if there is a leak between the walls which disrupts lead work that is harmful to my child as well.    What is the plan from here? I feel we need a meeting and once the roof is fully examined we can rule out if there is a leak somewhere that could affect the lead work performed.

He replied the same day:

 

I can get with Scott to try to do that in the near future, but right now if you are concerned about a lead issue I need to look into that as soon as possible. I was contacted by HHS with your concern and need to get back with them.

Barb Kimmel emailed Jessica on June 12:

 

Thank you very much for your additional communication and additional photos as well.  Dennis Graham from the Development Office has been in contact with you several times regarding the roof since we were first notified of your concerns regarding the roof on May 21st, 2018.  He has communicated to you several times, as recently as yesterday, June 11th.  He visited your home in May, and at that time, Dennis climbed up on your roof to view your concerns closely.  He  agreed that repairs were needed.   The contractor was notified, and sent out workers to perform repairs, and you became alarmed by their comments about the roof, and would not let them do the work.   Our understanding is that the contractor is back from vacation, and was on site this morning to assess the roof.  We are certain that he will address these issues to your satisfaction and ours, if you will allow this.  He is a reputable contractor, with many years of experience, and is licensed and insured, with many happy customers.  We expect communication from the contractor regarding your roof today.   You mentioned concerns about possible deterioration of work done to remediate lead-based paint hazards due to a roof leak.  You stated that the the roof is not currently leaking but you are concerned about a musty smell.  Dennis Graham can inspect areas where lead paint was repaired to see if deterioration is taking place, and investigate the cause of the musty odor.    Please let Dennis Graham know when he can gain entry to inspect the areas of concern you identified regarding lead based paint, and investigate the musty odor.    In an effort to work with your schedule, Dennis is available as early as 6:30 am Monday through Friday.  You can reach Dennis at 517-483-4054 or at dennis.graham@lansingmi.gov   We look forward to assisting you in resolving these issues.

A short time later on June 12, Jessica sent a long email to the Development Office, Scott Frederickson, Barb Kimmel, Robin Edmondson, Matthew Schraft, Courtney Wisinski of MDSS and city council member Carol Wood:

 

As many of you have been in contact with me the past few days, I would like to follow up with this email in which everyone is attached. There is an obvious issue with the roofing here at my home at 1417 Corbett Street in Lansing. The roof was replaced by Scott Fredrickson Construction under a Rehabilitation Loan provided by the City of Lansing's Planning and Development office. For any of you that have received photos prior to tonight, those were taken via my cell phone. I have attached at the bottom of this email, photos that I took with my digital camera which is able to pick up more detail. Upon taking these photos, I also became aware of more damaged areas especially the siding.  In the last two of the photos you can also see the gutter straps freely in the gutter rather than attached to the roof, I was advised that these would be attached under the shingles on the new roof so as to not damage the new shingles. Apparently that was never done.   The purpose of applying for this program was for my family to rehab our home and make repairs that we could not fully financially cover ourselves. Keep in mind that while some of the cost of this project was covered through grants, the greater majority of the funding is a no interest loan in which a lien was placed on my home for 30,000 and I also brought over 3,000 of my own money towards this project to make it happen. A roof is a huge investment and should last several years, my current roof doesn't look like it would last through a high wind storm, the current state of my roofing as well as a the shingles is absolutely unacceptable. As a program centered to assist lower income individuals, you should be ashamed of the work that was completed.   I kindly ask that all of you take a look at the pictures below and put yourselves in my shoes. How would you feel if the place that you call home was supposed to be repaired and looks like this? Would you consider this acceptable? Would you just sit back and say nothing at all? I do not feel that I am being irrational in asking that this be addressed immediately and correctly. While I am not a roofer,  I know enough to know that a little tar and nails is not going to fix this and that was even confirmed by Scott's roofing crew on Friday. We must all be on the same page as far as the repairs and a meeting is required in order to do so.    I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a response. Due to my work schedule (9:30-6:00) and the nature of the my work (phone registration), I am unavailable to talk via phone during those times and email is the fastest and easiest way to connect with me.

Jessica emailed Barb Kimmel again on June 19:

 

Dennis and I did get together and he investigated the musty odor and while he could not smell it, he and I discussed that the crawl space directly below is not vented. He stated he would speak with the director regarding this and I have not heard anything back yet.   I contacted Courtney who was going to touch base with you regarding the crawl space and the musty odor. The crawl space originally was to be conjoined with the bigger crawl space through and access made through the wall however due to lack of funds that spec was deleted. The window that was originally in that crawl space however was removed due to lead based paint hazards and blocked in with brick and mortar and no vents were installed. I believe that is because originally the space would of vented to the bigger crawl space. There also is no access to this portion of the crawl space since doing so.   Do you happen to have any info on the status of the crawl space venting or what the plan is? The smell is definitely more prevalent during humid days and days in which we receive rain.

Graham had visited the home on June 13. In a June 19 letter to Mark and Jessica, he said the musty odor may be coming from an inaccessible crawl space under the home. Before the construction, it had a window that provided some ventilation, but it was removed and blocked off "because it was deemed to be a lead paint hazard by the Risk Assessor..." That was in lieu of a more extensive solution that the couple decided against because of the cost. He recommended that when their finances allow, they have the original specified work done and in the meantime, use a dehumidifier.  

Barb Kimmel emailed Jessica on June 20:

 

Thanks for reaching out regarding the crawlspace.     The City had included crawlspace work in the original specifications, but it was deleted along with some other work, in consultation with you, so the project would be affordable enough to move forward, as all bids came back high.  A letter from Dennis Graham is attached, which explains the crawlspace situation in further detail.  The City has expended our funding and we suggest you make those repairs as soon as your financial situation allows.

Note her statement that "all bids came back high." Jessica and Mark saw only one bid.

On June 22, Jessica and Mark emailed Barb Kimmel with copies to Donald Kulhanek, Dennis Graham, Robin Edmondson, Courtney Wisinski, Matthew Schraft and Carol Wood:

 

Mark and I are responding to your latest e-mail dated 6/20/2018, in which you suggest that the proper resolution to the most recent health and safety risk to our family is to bear the cost of this risk, with the current risk actually created and advanced by city and state risk assessors, code compliance professionals, and a contractor that should be knowledgeable and is licensed to identify health and safety risks, and the appropriate city and state codes to minimize and remediate such risks, when undertaking home rehabilitation projects, under city and state administered programs specifically designed to identify and remediate health and safety risks to persons, especially children, residing in older homes such as the home in which we live, built in 1918.     We wish to review how we got to the current need for a resolution to a serious risk to the health and safety of our family, namely the potential for a toxic and deadly mold infestation, which was not of our making, and could and should have been avoided by the numerous city, state, and contractor professionals in risk assessment and code compliance as our request for assistance and the home rehabilitation project proceeded to the current and unfortunate unacceptable conclusion. Based on televised public service announcements, designed to raise awareness of the hazardous risks to the health of young children living in older homes, such as but not limited to the existence of lead-based paint, and the availability of government assistance programs to identify and assess, and remediate the risks to the health of children, we contacted the city to pursue steps to protect the health and safety of our young daughter. Health risk and code compliance assessments were conducted and based upon the assessment results, a remediation project plan to-do list was completed.  The to-do list included required code compliance items, as well as nice-to-have items for further health and safety safeguards. Bids were obtained for the compiled to-do list.  We were informed that unfortunately, the lowest bid exceeded available rehabilitation funds, and if the city were to proceed with the rehabilitation project, non-essential items beyond code compliance needed to be deleted, and by e-mail dated 9/21/2016 we were informed that project personnel would work with the bid contractor to identify items that could be deleted, which were of a nature that were non-health and safety high risk and non-code compliance items.  After such review, we were informed that despite including only high-risk and code compliance items, there was still a shortage of available funds, and the city expected us to contribute the shortfall amount, for the city to proceed to include and complete all of the code compliance items.       By email from Robin dated 9/21/2016 we were informed the funds we needed to contribute was $3351.70, and that this would cover all code compliance items and issues.  These funds were provided by us and the project was completed about 1/18/2017, and city inspected for full code compliance. Early this month we detected a musty smell coming from wall electrical outlets, and upon extensive investigation, we have learned from the city code compliance department, the odor is a result of the removal and blockage, project list number 22, of the only access and ventilation window to the house crawl space.  While the window was seldom opened, over the 8 years that we have occupied the home, the deteriorated wooden frame surrounding the window did provide adequate ventilation to avoid any musty odor and the potential for a toxic and deadly mold infestation to occur.  It is incomprehensive and unacceptable that in the review by code compliance and contractor professionals, to identify non-code compliance items to be deleted for budgetary reasons, that any oversight of access and ventilation code compliance  items (#29, #46, and #60), were essential and needed to be included for full code compliance items to avoid a potentially toxic and deadly mold problem, especially given that the sole crawl space access and ventilation window was required to be removed and replaced with blocks, to abate the risk and potential of lead poisoning.  Only the code compliance and contractor professionals possess the knowledge necessary to know that the crawl spaces access and ventilation could and should not have been among the items deleted for purely budgetary reasons.  Secondly, per the Michigan Residential Building Code R408.0 “Under Floor Space”, R408.1 states that the underfloor space between the bottom of the floor joists and the earth under any building (except space occupied by a basement of cellar) shall be provided with ventilation openings through the foundation walls or exterior walls at a rate of 1 sq. ft of opening per 150 sq. ft of area. One such opening shall be located within 3’ of each corner of the building. R408.3 in regards to access, states that an access opening of 18x24 through the floor or 16x24 through a wall shall be provided to the crawl space.  Note that there is an exception to R408.0 whereas ventilation openings are not required if the space is mechanically ventilated at a rate of 1 CFM for each 50 sq. ft of floor area, and the ground surface is covered with an approved vapor barrier (Item 29 & 60, had they of been completed). This has also been confirmed by the City of Lansing’s Building Safety office. It is unreasonable and unacceptable to presume that we as the homeowners should possess such knowledge, despite our consent to the deleted items, so the rehabilitation project could proceed to implementation and completion.  In addition, city code professionals could and should have caught their oversight of the access and ventilation non-compliance deletion upon inspection and approval of the completed work, and should have corrected the current condition caused by their oversight. In sum, any oversight of full code compliance by the city code compliance and contractor professionals has left us as homeowners and the parents of a young child in a more vulnerable and worse higher health risk than before we relied on the city to properly achieve health risk reduction and full code compliance to maximize the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of our young child and ourselves, under older home rehabilitation programs administered by the city and state partners to achieve health and safety of children and adults. We believe it is incumbent on the city and its' state partners to accept responsibility and accountability for the oversight of the city code compliance and contractor professionals who have placed us in a worse position, and take all steps to immediately remove any hazard and risk to our health of a toxic and potentially deadly mold infestation as a direct result of the professionals' oversight. Not only is this a major concern as we have a young child but also in the fact that I am asthmatic and suffer from severe allergies. In fact, on May 30th 2018, I received my prescription asthma inhaler that comes in 200 metered doses (30 day supply).  Approximately two weeks after receiving this inhaler, I was down to 10 doses left. A direct result of breathing in the toxic musty odor.  While my child has not yet been diagnosed with asthma herself, she is genetically at a higher risk of developing such an ailment. We look forward to a timely and acceptable resolution of this serious hazard to our health and home created by no fault of our own.

The very last communication from the City came June 29, 2018. It was from Donald Kulhanek, Development Manager, with copies to all the usual people plus Brian McGrain, Director of the Development Office:

 

Dear Ms. Madden: This is in reply to your below email. We’ve consulted internally and reviewed the file, as well as your various correspondence.  We take your health and wellness concerns very seriously.  Recently, you brought two issues regarding the rehabilitation of your home to our attention.  First, you advised that the roof was in need of warranty repairs.  Those repairs were successfully completed on June 22, 2018.  Second, you have indicated there is a musty odor in your home that you attribute to elimination of a window in the crawl space.  This window was eliminated with your concurrence.  From that musty odor, you surmise the causation was elimination of the window (which wasn’t opened), the growth of mold (which hasn’t been observed), and potential adverse health effects.  We have advised previously that available funds on this project have been expended.  The City never agreed to fix every code violation in the home, nor was adequate funding available.  There was nothing done to or in your home in violation of applicable codes or standards.  The work done by your contractor passed a Building Safety Office inspection.  Put more succinctly, musty odors are not uncommon in older homes, with or without ventilated crawlspaces.  The City will not be doing any further rehabilitation at your home.  As always, your home and its upkeep to your standards remains your responsibility.

On November 2 Jessica told me

Send comments, questions, and tips to stevenrharry@gmail.com or call or text me at 517-730-2638. If you'd like to be notified by email when I post a new story, let me know.

Previous stories