Good intentions make bad laws for local governments
An important legal question concerning our personal rights has been playing out in at least two Iowa cities. In Cedar Falls, Nick Taiber was the only council member to vote against the ordinance. Constitutional questions aside, I know what Harry Browne would say about this: every new government program is subject to politics, it will suffer from poor or indifferent administration, it will end up costing more than originally planned, it will fail to work any better than the previous scheme, it will have unintended negative consequences, and will ultimately be misused. Will government want the keys to my car “just in case” next? Don't doubt it.
I urge you all to read Nick Taiber's article below about this ordinance and why he voted against it.
Hand Over Your Keys to Government
On June 13th, the Cedar Falls City Council decided it knew best how to protect your property. The code, an update of the 2005 ordinance which passed without opposition, required lock boxes on all commercial and industrial property, with or without supervised alarm systems. In addition, it expanded the requirement to all residential properties with more than two dwellings. In effect, it slapped a tool of government on the face of private property.
Ordinance proponents argue that key box entry points are needed to minimize potential damage and to speed entry to evaluate life and property threats. As innocuous it seems, any reasonable person is left scratching their head why this is good code. Going even beyond the requirements of the 2009 International Fire Code which was being adopted in the same measure (and a subject of another article), the council reaffirmed its ‘we know better’ belief despite mountains of local and national opposition.
First, the ordinance is notable because it is an unfunded mandate. At the property owner’s expense, each must research, procure, and install a lock box which could cost between $300 to $1000. At $500 per installation and 841 commercially-zoned properties with building valuations, this amounts to an unfunded mandate just shy of $500,000 for commercial properties alone.
Second, the ordinance effectively gave government the keys to your business or home which poses serious constitutional concern. The master key could open any property in the City of Cedar Falls, without record or knowledge to the property owner. Today, that responsibility is afforded to the certain city officials in time of emergency. In an era of warrant-less searches and pervasive homeland security programs, it is foreseeable that this convenient access tool could be used with abusive purpose. Of course, memos were provided describing the ‘constitutionality’ of the ordinance, but they did little to address the constitutional concern. In the event of emergency, 4th Amendment rights (protecting citizens from illegal search and seizure) are temporarily suspended so emergency responders can do their duties. In the words of the court, implied consent is granted in emergency response and searches, such as the ‘plain view’ doctrine, are considered legal searches. Cedar Falls data suggests ‘emergencies’ are more likely to occur if you have a lock box than otherwise.
Third, the ordinance creates new management burdens and ongoing costs. The lock box will contain a key to each locked egress point on the property. What happens when/if the single master single key falls into the hands of an unscrupulous employee? A more likely event is human error – a misplaced, dropped in action, or forgotten key. Every box will need to be re-keyed at taxpayer expense. In addition, each time a property changes a key to a regulated access point, the property owner must notify the city to update the box contents. Vandalism is yet another documented concern.
Consider the 841 commercial properties in Cedar Falls. 269 had lock boxes prior to the ordinance update (one of which was reported as voluntary). In 2010, 98 emergency commercial property entries occurred through the lock box. Of the remaining non-lock box properties, 0 forcible entries were attempted. In the same time period, there was less than $25,000 of commercial property damage due to fire emergency.
The lock box is a solution looking for a problem. This ordinance denies choice and instead imposes yet another costly mandate with no public benefit and a lot of constitutional concern.
In the days running up to the vote and as a result of council footage that went viral, council members were inundated with calls and emails, many of which were distasteful and sometimes downright threatening. While the massive social media exposure generated awareness, it may have doomed the no lock box repeal effort because due to the nonconstructive nature of the emails. So while Cedar Falls and communities across Iowa have adopted mandatory lock box codes, this writer is convinced the debate has been productive, raising awareness and local action in opposition to over-reaching government on the local level.
Nick Taiber, Councilman at Large
Cedar Falls, IA