CHAMBERSBURG, Pa.- Questions around the borough’s residential rental unit inspection program surfaced during Tuesday’s Chambersburg Town Council meeting at the start of the 2027 budget process in August.
Following presentations by Phil Wolgemuth, deputy borough manager/land use and community development director, and Hannah Rowe, an account manager with the Pennsylvania Municipal Code Alliance, several council members raised concerns about rental property inspection standards.
John Huber, finance chair, referenced cracked paint as an example of a code violation and, speaking as a property owner, expressed concern that inspectors may feael compelled to “find something wrong” with rental properties.
Kim Spittler, the regional operations manager of the alliance, was unable to address the specific incident, but stated that chipped or cracked paint would not likely result in re-inspection, though lead paint could be an area of concern.
Spittler told the council his inspector is there to “help you meet your requirements and not hinder you from meeting your requirements”.
Austin Rosenbaum, a Borough Council member, also expressed concern that inspectors may be overly nitpicky, noting that re-inspection numbers rose from 500 to 1,150 after the switch from a 2-year period.
Spittler then asked how many rental properties had been added during that period, to which Rosenbaum responded with about 200.
Public comments followed, with Valerie Jordan noting that older homes may contain lead paint, and Stacy Short spoke as a renter who has gone through the inspection process.
Short stated inspection fees affect rental affordability, but her primary concern was invasion of privacy by inspectors. She urged the borough to revisit the ordinance and update it to limit inspections to vacant homes at move-in, move-out or in response to complaints.
Chambersburg Borough contracts with the Pennsylvania Municipal Code Alliance, a third-party service, to enforce its rental property code.
Rental units are inspected for code compliance approximately every 36 months and are subject to an annual program fee of $25 per rental unit. Borough property maintenance enforcement officers handle specific complaints about the units.
The presentation slides outlined two options for council members: continue using third-party code enforcement or bring the program in-house.
Bringing the program in-house was projected to cost the borough more than continuing its contract with the Alliance, which is $75,000 per year.
Wolgemuth also presented a third option: repealing the rental property code and ending the program. He noted that the previous council had not shown interest in that approach but included it for the new council’s consideration.
Decision-making around the program’s existence will continue at a later meeting as the 2027 budget process begins in August.
