New laws help home builders save money, but with big risks | Opinion

You may think home builders are all about raising walls and hammering down roofs, but in North Carolina they’re also quite adept at raising legislation and hammering down opposition.

The home building industry is among the state’s most powerful lobbying groups.

According to campaign finance watchdog Bob Hall, the N.C. Home Builders Association PAC has donated more than $1 million in political contributions since 2018, with most of the money going to key state lawmakers. The recipients include Senate leader Phil Berger, who got $40,000, and House Speaker Tim Moore, who got $27,200.

The influence of the home builders was demonstrated this week as Republican lawmakers overrode Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto of Senate Bill 166, which reshapes the state Building Code Council. It shrinks the council from 17 to 13 members, removes the requirement that two architects be members and gives more control to contractors.

The override of Senate Bill 166 follows the 2023 passage – also by veto override – of House Bill 488, which created a separate Residential Building Code Council that is likewise dominated by contractors and does not include architects.

The North Carolina chapter of the American Institute of Architects strongly objected to the changes. In a memorandum asking Cooper to veto House Bill 488, the group said: “Having a separate code council only for residential construction is an attempt to completely control the regulatory decision making and authorization processes. The proposal will lead to an endless roll back of health and safety code provisions and a stagnation of building technology in the residential market.”

J. Richard Alsop Jr., an architect and former advocacy director of the North Carolina chapter of the American Institute of Architects, is alarmed at how the home building industry has cut out architects. They are experts on including code requirements in building plans and are advocates for code changes that promote building safety and energy efficiency.

“People think our job is to make buildings look pretty, but in reality our job is to make buildings safe,” Alsop told me. “And this just flies in the face of that.”

State Sen. Natasha Marcus, a Mecklenburg County Democrat and candidate for state insurance commissioner, agrees. She said in an NC Newsline report on the Senate Bill 166 override debate: “It’s irresponsible to remove the architects and we should not allow politics to be more important than the public’s safety.”

Alsop noted that House Bill 488 sharply limited inspection requirements for sheathing, the plywood wrap that helps buildings withstand high winds.

Architects back stronger standards for safety and energy conservation to save homeowners on utility costs. With them off the Building Code Council, that advocacy has been lost.

Tim Minton, executive vice president of the N.C. Home Builders Association, said architects and the public will still have a voice in shaping the state’s various construction codes. “Any citizen can bring code recommendations to the code council at any time,” he said. “It’s a pretty wide open process.”

Minton said home builders also want safe buildings, but they oppose requirements that they say create unnecessary delays or drive up the cost of new homes.

“To build a house is highly regulated – and it should be,” he said. “But when making changes, you have to recognize what it’s going to cost and how it will impact the markets as a whole. Nothing is free.”

Climate change is making it urgent that building codes be strengthened as hurricanes, flooding and wildfires grow more intense and more frequent.

“We design buildings for people to occupy in the future. The old code was fine then, but it’s not now,” Alsop said. “We need to work together in a way that is going to promote public safety and if we are not willing to do that we are never going to have safe buildings.”

As North Carolina resists code changes to reduce builders’ expense, it will cost the state millions in federal dollars. The federal government will not pay for rebuilding after natural disasters if a state is following older and weaker building codes.

The home building industry has been generous, shrewd and effective in getting what it wants from the General Assembly. But letting the industry have its way will lead not to cheaper homes, but to costly hazards.

Associate opinion editor Ned Barnett can be reached at 919-404-7583, or nbarnett@ newsobserver.com