The Misperception of Dangers & Armor

by Justin Edson, CCEA, COSS

Unfortunately this comes up more than it should. We continue to try to shift the narrative and educate decision makers about the dangers of enforcing codes. We even have some in the profession that might have been fortunate to never face a threat, attempted murder, assault, or be stalked at their home. The reality is that many citizens are not fond of the government telling them what to do on THEIR property. “You need to cut your lawn, paint your house, clean up the junk in the yard, impound your dog, or remove an inoperable vehicle in the driveway.” Oh and you might be cited or taken to court. The majority of the population care about their property and never interact with Code Enforcement. But the ones who have these issues can come into contact with an Inspector or Officer. Of course we can all agree that we want to provide exceptional customer service, provide opportunities to comply, and be the friendly government representative. None of that can prepare you for mental illness, stress, life changing events, or drugs. How many of you set foot on private property? On a job site? In a business? Do you know if that person just got divorced yesterday? Or lost a loved one? Or filed bankruptcy?

Recently, a colleague on social media in a different state and who I have never met, posted about wearing body armor and changing the old narrative that Code Enforcement doesn’t need armor. He received 100+ likes and numerous comments of support. However, there are those who do not do our job nor have they experienced the environment so many of us have faced.

A private sector consultant stated, “This is a bad idea and projects a bad image. You are code enforcement, not law enforcement. You are there to facilitate construction and resolve code conflicts, NOT intimidate by militarizing your presence. If you want a job that offers 100% protection from harm, get a job as a pillow tester.”

Sadly, some Code Officials liked that comment. Do these Officers look militarized or intimidating?

I would like to highlight my concerns with that statement:

• Militarized look (intimidating) - Besides the neon colors and vests that match uniforms so they do not look “tactical,” body armor also comes concealed under your polo shirt and jacket. No one can be intimidated by something under your shirt.
• Code Enforcement & Law Enforcement - In some states code enforcement is classified as law enforcement. This is why a broad and generalized statement like this is not helpful to the conversation. And law enforcement are not the only ones who wear body armor. What about: security, Fire, mental health clinicians, nonsworn police personnel, ACO’s, Park Rangers, EMT’s, and the list goes on.
• Construction & Code Conflicts - That is typically not all that Code Enforcement does. We now handle homeless camps, drug houses, dispensaries, sovereign citizens, condemnations, bio labs, street vendors, and misdemeanor violations. Jill Robinson was gunned down talking to a resident about cutting his grass (no vest on her). Charles Case was gunned down posting a red tag on a front door (no vest). Dennis Catanyag was stabbed to death after PASSING a restaurant inspection (no vest). Michael Tripus was gunned down in City Hall over a mold complaint (no vest). Earl Bowman went to a job site to inspect and was stabbed to death by a guy on drugs (no vest).

It is heart breaking to see the threats, assaults, and murders across the globe of officials who regulate codes. I don’t expect to force someone to think differently, but I hope folks can open their eyes and ears to at least see the data without making off the cuff assumptions.

One Code Official responded to this statement by saying, “If you’ve been in the field for any length of time, you understand how unpredictable people can be when confronted about their property conditions. My teams have experienced weapons drawn, verbal/physical attacks, gun shots, and even homicide scenes. I’ll take protection over perception any day!”

Another Code Official stated, “As a former Police Officer and current Code Enforcement Officer, your level of naivety is frightening.”

 

 [West Valley, Utah team with their new vests next to Officer Jill Robinson's Memorial in the lobby]

I can’t be the only one who is shocked that body armor worn under the shirt, is such a debated subject with so many naive opinions. I might expect this with a discussion about firearms. Body armor can’t hurt anyone! But they can save an employees life. Think about OSHA and numerous laws coming out of California now about protecting employees. And CEOSF has a Request a Vest Program where you can apply to potentially receive body armor for free. I also wonder why the Department of Justice (DOJ) lists Code Enforcement as an approved job duty to receive body armor grants. Probably because they see the dangers of this role. 

 

 -----

About the Author

Justin Edson is a Public Safety Manager in California and previously served as a Building, Neighborhood Services, and Code Enforcement Manager across several cities. He is an ICC Certified Code Enforcement Administrator and a POST Field Training Officer. Prior to his 8+ years in Code Enforcement, he was with a Police Department for nearly 10 years. Justin was the Founding President of the Code Enforcement Officer Safety Foundation.