A 25 May Western Front Editorial Board opinion piece reversed an earlier, 26 January editorial that opposed rental licensing in Bellingham. The Board stated that it "has come to believe that the health and safety benefits of landlord licensing would far outweigh any slight increases in rent." The reversal of an editorial position takes some courage and this blogger doffs his editorial hat in recognition of the Western Front's decision. (You can read the 26 January editorial by clicking here. The 25 May editorial link is here). This reversal follows a lively discussion held by the Viking Community Builders on 17 May on the topic of rental licensing. The Zonemaven described that event in an earlier blog entry (here).
Noting the health and safety benefits and the inability of students to determine if the units they are renting are in livable condition, the editorial dismissed the objections of landlords and supported the concept of a rental inspection program. The Board also recognized the advisability of the local government to regulate that which is equivalent to a public accommodation, e.g., hotels or restaurants.
The Zonemaven, in continuing conversations with WWU students, has noted a growing movement among them to organize, gather information and to take a message to the City Council that the students will no longer tolerate sub-standard housing and the annual "crap shoot" in hunting for a decent place to live. With over 8,000 renters among the student body, the City Council will have to take notice.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Landlords Resort to FUD Tactics at WWU Forum on Rental Licensing
FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) was the methodology chosen by landlord representatives at a forum on rental licensing (click here to read the announcement) that was organized and sponsored by the Viking Community Builders, a student group interested in relationships with the community. Instead of speaking to the issues and providing hard evidence for their assertions, the three panelists in opposition of licensing did their best to obfuscate and divert the discussion with red herring arguments and specious reasoning. Lest the students forget, those speaking against rental licensing and inspection are modern day paladins for the landlords, to wit two of the three: Doug Robertson is an attorney for landlords. Perry Eskridge is in real estate and is the governmental representative for the Whatcom Association of Realtors. The third panelist in opposition to licensing was landlord Mel Davidson. Student attendees should make no mistake. These are rental industry professionals.
Usually, the use of FUD tactics is a sign that your arguments are weak and, therefore, you sow doubt by any means possible. The goal is to make the opposition look bad instead of dealing with the facts. Thus, debate is corrupted. And so it went last Monday evening, although with the questions from the floor, it was evident that not all were bamboozled.
Panelists confronting those who opposed rental licensing were this blogger; Nick Johnson, Editor-in-Chief of the Western Front; and Dave Hopkinson, a landlord in the York neighborhood.
The Zonemaven does not shy from debate but deplores alleged statements of fact that are not supported by any data. While this blogger is tempted to refute here, yet again and point by point, the landlords' disingenuous propositions, readers can peruse a blog entry (here) in which I reviewed a paper on the letterhead of law firm Belcher/Swanson, submitted by panelist/attorney Doug Robertson to the City Council on behalf of the landlords. Mr. Robertson's presentation at the forum pretty well followed that flawed document.
Nonetheless, let us take a look at a few of the tar balls launched by licensing opponents Monday evening in the hope that the audience would grab them and thus become stuck.
- Low cost housing availability will drop. As this blogger indicated above, the landlord representatives provided no documentation, no study, no report, no proof that this would be the case. In contrast, the Zonemaven actually picked up the phone and called an official in Pasco, WA, where a licensing and inspection program has been in force for years. The official stated that there were some really badly maintained homes that were sold and then bought at low prices by locals of modest means who were willing to fix them. That is called affordable home ownership.
- Licensing will create a huge and costly bureaucracy of 5 code enforcement officers. This contention was quickly refuted by Mark Gardner, the Legislative Policy Analyst for the Bellingham City Council. Politely, Mr. Gardner pointed out to the audience that the landlord reps were "confusing" the presentation of a continuum of possibilities with an actual proposal. Anyone who took the time to read the study prepared by Mr. Gardner would have been aware of this. You can read the study here and decide for yourself. Additionally, any such program can be self-sustaining with reasonable per unit fees of several dollars per month. This will hardly break the bank or cause undue financial hardship for renters, even if the landlords decide to pass the cost of licensing to the tenants.
- Landlords and tenants are on equal footing and have equal interests. This is largely based on the contention that the Revised Code of Washington's landlord/tenant provisions level the playing field. Perhaps this is true if you are a tenant who has the time, the money and other resources to battle a landlord whose business (24/7) is to maximize return on investment. Students may have other bothersome commitments with respect to attending class and working for tuition money. Furthermore, the RCW does not mandate inspections of rental properties for health and safety reasons, the main objective of any such legislation in Bellingham. The idea here is prevention and not an sclerotic and ineffective complaint process.
- Bellingham is not like other cities with inspections programs as the others have large migratory worker populations. As panelist, Nick Johnson astutely pointed out, nothing could be more migratory than 8,000 student renters annually. As in other such cities, renter populations such as these are ripe for exploitation given the short time frames in a rental, lack of resources and an inherently sluggish judicial process.
- There is no problem to be solved. This means that Bellingham's rental stock is in good shape and there may be on the outside only a few rental units in poor condition. This flies in the face of the experience of other cities that have instituted rental licensing. It is disingenuous to state that Bellingham is somehow outside of the norm with its 17,000 rental units provided to a highly transitory population. This, unfortunately, is a continuation of landlord contentions that there are only a few bad landlords. They stated this during the large meeting on rental licensing held in 2004. I challenged them to tell the audience about all the" bad" landlords subsequently shut down in Bellingham by action of the "good" landlords policing their own. The response: 2
- Renters privacy will be violated. This is a valid concern for which any legislation should contain language that limits the scope of the inspection to that related to health and safety. Current state law already provides for landlord entry into a rental with 48 hour notice except for emergencies. Current state law also limits rental inspections to once every three years. Given the transient nature of most of our renters, many will never see an inspection while living in a rental. Again, the Zonemaven contacted Pasco to determine their protocols while inspecting units. There, inspectors focus only on the items on their checklist. Obviously, if they see a meth lab in the back room, that would be a reportable condition. In any case, with respect to Pasco, the police have to follow established procedures (warrants and due process) in going back to a rental unit.
For those readers who wish to explore previous Zonemaven blogs on this topic, you can click on the following links:
1. Landlords and Supporters Speak. 24 Nov 09
2. Landlord Misinformation 26 Nov 09
3. A Lesson from Lexington, KY 29 Nov 09
4. Effective Program for Bellingham? 4 Jan 10
5. Letter to Students on Rental Licensing 2 Feb 10
6. Landlord Support for Rental Licensing 8 Mar 10
7. Licensing Not About Single Family Zoning 2 Apr 10
And finally this, written two years ago.
8. We Do Not Know 4 Jun 08
Thanks to the Viking Community Builders for having put on this forum. A job well done.
Usually, the use of FUD tactics is a sign that your arguments are weak and, therefore, you sow doubt by any means possible. The goal is to make the opposition look bad instead of dealing with the facts. Thus, debate is corrupted. And so it went last Monday evening, although with the questions from the floor, it was evident that not all were bamboozled.
Panelists confronting those who opposed rental licensing were this blogger; Nick Johnson, Editor-in-Chief of the Western Front; and Dave Hopkinson, a landlord in the York neighborhood.
The Zonemaven does not shy from debate but deplores alleged statements of fact that are not supported by any data. While this blogger is tempted to refute here, yet again and point by point, the landlords' disingenuous propositions, readers can peruse a blog entry (here) in which I reviewed a paper on the letterhead of law firm Belcher/Swanson, submitted by panelist/attorney Doug Robertson to the City Council on behalf of the landlords. Mr. Robertson's presentation at the forum pretty well followed that flawed document.
Nonetheless, let us take a look at a few of the tar balls launched by licensing opponents Monday evening in the hope that the audience would grab them and thus become stuck.
- Low cost housing availability will drop. As this blogger indicated above, the landlord representatives provided no documentation, no study, no report, no proof that this would be the case. In contrast, the Zonemaven actually picked up the phone and called an official in Pasco, WA, where a licensing and inspection program has been in force for years. The official stated that there were some really badly maintained homes that were sold and then bought at low prices by locals of modest means who were willing to fix them. That is called affordable home ownership.
- Licensing will create a huge and costly bureaucracy of 5 code enforcement officers. This contention was quickly refuted by Mark Gardner, the Legislative Policy Analyst for the Bellingham City Council. Politely, Mr. Gardner pointed out to the audience that the landlord reps were "confusing" the presentation of a continuum of possibilities with an actual proposal. Anyone who took the time to read the study prepared by Mr. Gardner would have been aware of this. You can read the study here and decide for yourself. Additionally, any such program can be self-sustaining with reasonable per unit fees of several dollars per month. This will hardly break the bank or cause undue financial hardship for renters, even if the landlords decide to pass the cost of licensing to the tenants.
- Landlords and tenants are on equal footing and have equal interests. This is largely based on the contention that the Revised Code of Washington's landlord/tenant provisions level the playing field. Perhaps this is true if you are a tenant who has the time, the money and other resources to battle a landlord whose business (24/7) is to maximize return on investment. Students may have other bothersome commitments with respect to attending class and working for tuition money. Furthermore, the RCW does not mandate inspections of rental properties for health and safety reasons, the main objective of any such legislation in Bellingham. The idea here is prevention and not an sclerotic and ineffective complaint process.
- Bellingham is not like other cities with inspections programs as the others have large migratory worker populations. As panelist, Nick Johnson astutely pointed out, nothing could be more migratory than 8,000 student renters annually. As in other such cities, renter populations such as these are ripe for exploitation given the short time frames in a rental, lack of resources and an inherently sluggish judicial process.
- There is no problem to be solved. This means that Bellingham's rental stock is in good shape and there may be on the outside only a few rental units in poor condition. This flies in the face of the experience of other cities that have instituted rental licensing. It is disingenuous to state that Bellingham is somehow outside of the norm with its 17,000 rental units provided to a highly transitory population. This, unfortunately, is a continuation of landlord contentions that there are only a few bad landlords. They stated this during the large meeting on rental licensing held in 2004. I challenged them to tell the audience about all the" bad" landlords subsequently shut down in Bellingham by action of the "good" landlords policing their own. The response: 2
- Renters privacy will be violated. This is a valid concern for which any legislation should contain language that limits the scope of the inspection to that related to health and safety. Current state law already provides for landlord entry into a rental with 48 hour notice except for emergencies. Current state law also limits rental inspections to once every three years. Given the transient nature of most of our renters, many will never see an inspection while living in a rental. Again, the Zonemaven contacted Pasco to determine their protocols while inspecting units. There, inspectors focus only on the items on their checklist. Obviously, if they see a meth lab in the back room, that would be a reportable condition. In any case, with respect to Pasco, the police have to follow established procedures (warrants and due process) in going back to a rental unit.
For those readers who wish to explore previous Zonemaven blogs on this topic, you can click on the following links:
1. Landlords and Supporters Speak. 24 Nov 09
2. Landlord Misinformation 26 Nov 09
3. A Lesson from Lexington, KY 29 Nov 09
4. Effective Program for Bellingham? 4 Jan 10
5. Letter to Students on Rental Licensing 2 Feb 10
6. Landlord Support for Rental Licensing 8 Mar 10
7. Licensing Not About Single Family Zoning 2 Apr 10
And finally this, written two years ago.
8. We Do Not Know 4 Jun 08
Thanks to the Viking Community Builders for having put on this forum. A job well done.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Briefing at Bellingham City Council on Sacramento Rental Licensing Program
The Bellingham City Council will receive a briefing from staff this Monday, 24 May, on the rental licensing program adopted by the city of Sacramento, CA. The council meeting begins at 7pm, although the briefing will be presented initially to the Planning and Neighborhoods Committee that convenes at 1:40pm in council chambers.
You can read the agenda bill on the Sacramento program by clicking here. Also on the agenda bill is the the Washington State law on rental licensing and inspection that was recently passed by the state legislature. You can read my blog comments on that bill by clicking here.
There is no hearing on rental licensing at this council meeting although the agenda calls for a discussion of options by the council. In March, the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Commission had recommended that "a rental licensing and inspection ordinance be drawn up for review and discussion in 2010 in a public process". (Click here to read the minutes of that discussion)
You can read the agenda bill on the Sacramento program by clicking here. Also on the agenda bill is the the Washington State law on rental licensing and inspection that was recently passed by the state legislature. You can read my blog comments on that bill by clicking here.
There is no hearing on rental licensing at this council meeting although the agenda calls for a discussion of options by the council. In March, the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Commission had recommended that "a rental licensing and inspection ordinance be drawn up for review and discussion in 2010 in a public process". (Click here to read the minutes of that discussion)
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
WWU Students to Host Forum on Rental Licensing
The Viking Community Builders (VCB), a student group at Western Washington University, will host a forum to discuss the issue of rental licensing in Bellingham. The event, entitled "This House Is Not a Home", will be held on May 17th at 7pm on Western's campus in Academic West (Academic Instructional Center), Room 204. (Building number 53 at the map here)
According to information from the VCB, the event is for representatives of Western Washington, the City of Bellingham, student and community members to discuss Bellingham's options for rental licensing. The forum will provide an opportunity "to chat about the benefits and consequences for tenants, landlords and the community as a whole" and to "let your voice be heard". Free parking is available in the on-campus "C" lot (see parking map here). For questions on the event you can email the group at vikingcommunitybuilders@gmail.com.
The Viking Community Builders was formed to foster communication, connection and respect between the WWU community and long term Bellingham residents. For more on the VCB, click here to visit their web page on Facebook.
In recent months, I have encouraged students from Western to become involved in the topic as their numbers (8,000 off-campus residents) represent a formidable force in ensuring that the places they rent are safe and free from health hazards. You can read my open letter to students published in the Western Front on 23 April by clicking here or in my blog on 2 February by clicking here. You can review the study on rental licensing prepared for the Bellingham City Council by clicking here.
According to information from the VCB, the event is for representatives of Western Washington, the City of Bellingham, student and community members to discuss Bellingham's options for rental licensing. The forum will provide an opportunity "to chat about the benefits and consequences for tenants, landlords and the community as a whole" and to "let your voice be heard". Free parking is available in the on-campus "C" lot (see parking map here). For questions on the event you can email the group at vikingcommunitybuilders@gmail.com.
The Viking Community Builders was formed to foster communication, connection and respect between the WWU community and long term Bellingham residents. For more on the VCB, click here to visit their web page on Facebook.
In recent months, I have encouraged students from Western to become involved in the topic as their numbers (8,000 off-campus residents) represent a formidable force in ensuring that the places they rent are safe and free from health hazards. You can read my open letter to students published in the Western Front on 23 April by clicking here or in my blog on 2 February by clicking here. You can review the study on rental licensing prepared for the Bellingham City Council by clicking here.
Monday, April 12, 2010
New Coordinator Takes Over at the Campus Community Coalition
Lyndie Case became the new coordinator of the Campus Community Coalition (Click here for the CCC home page) as of April 5th. (Click here to read about the appointment) Lyndie replaces Lara Welker who left the post late last year. At the same time, the Coalition has been moved within the university hierarchy in recognition of the expanded mission of the organization. The Coalition had originally been established under the office of Prevention and Wellness Services as the primary focus was that of alcohol use and abuse. Now the Coalition will report to Sara J. Wilson, a special assistant to Dr. Eileen Coughlin, the Vice-President for Student Affairs and Academic Support Services.
The selection of Lyndie came at the end of a rather extended process during which members of the Bellingham Community, including the Zonemaven, were invited to meet with the two finalists. I found both candidates to be very well qualified but I also had a slight preference for the selected candidate. That being said, Lyndie now has to steer the Coalition into its expanded mission, thus creating an organization that many community members thought (mistakenly) to exist already. Being at the office level of a VP in the university structure will no doubt assist in this process.
It is unfortunate that, at present, WWU is the sole funding source for the Coalition in the form of the part-time salary and benefits of the new coordinator plus $12K in operating costs. The $10K that the Bellingham Police used to provide to the CCC has, unfortunately, been stripped from that department's budget. The police will continue to provide "in kind" services, such as the party patrol and officer time for events such as the Let's Talk forums. However, the city has largely bowed out financially. As late as the 2008-2009 budget, WWU provided $50,000 for the operation of the CCC, not including the part-time salary and benefits of the former coordinator. With the addition of the $10K from the city's police budget, the CCC had $60K from which to operate.
Only last fall, Mayor Pike and President Shepard were dancing cheek to cheek in celebration of the 10th anniversary of the Campus Community Coalition (click here to read about that). To his credit, Dr. Shepard not only continued funding the CCC but hired a new director in the face of terrible budget constraints. That being said, the Coalition will have to survive on a starvation diet in spite of the fact that the university is the largest employer in Bellingham and its relationship with the city (let alone the citizenry) is extremely important. Time will tell whither goeth the CCC.
The selection of Lyndie came at the end of a rather extended process during which members of the Bellingham Community, including the Zonemaven, were invited to meet with the two finalists. I found both candidates to be very well qualified but I also had a slight preference for the selected candidate. That being said, Lyndie now has to steer the Coalition into its expanded mission, thus creating an organization that many community members thought (mistakenly) to exist already. Being at the office level of a VP in the university structure will no doubt assist in this process.
It is unfortunate that, at present, WWU is the sole funding source for the Coalition in the form of the part-time salary and benefits of the new coordinator plus $12K in operating costs. The $10K that the Bellingham Police used to provide to the CCC has, unfortunately, been stripped from that department's budget. The police will continue to provide "in kind" services, such as the party patrol and officer time for events such as the Let's Talk forums. However, the city has largely bowed out financially. As late as the 2008-2009 budget, WWU provided $50,000 for the operation of the CCC, not including the part-time salary and benefits of the former coordinator. With the addition of the $10K from the city's police budget, the CCC had $60K from which to operate.
Only last fall, Mayor Pike and President Shepard were dancing cheek to cheek in celebration of the 10th anniversary of the Campus Community Coalition (click here to read about that). To his credit, Dr. Shepard not only continued funding the CCC but hired a new director in the face of terrible budget constraints. That being said, the Coalition will have to survive on a starvation diet in spite of the fact that the university is the largest employer in Bellingham and its relationship with the city (let alone the citizenry) is extremely important. Time will tell whither goeth the CCC.
Friday, April 2, 2010
STOP! Rental Licensing Is NOT About Single Family Zoning
As I have been speaking to representatives of various neighborhoods and to individuals throughout the community, I have found that many are conflating the current discussion about licensing rentals in Bellingham with the issue of single family zoning (so-called "rule of three"). These subjects are not interchangeable.
Rental licensing is about basic health and safety issues. Single family codes are about zoning and density. For those who have been reading this blog since its inception in 2007, you are aware that I am a vociferous supporter of the enforcement of zoning codes. Non-enforcement of these codes over the last several decades has had a deleterious effect on our neighborhoods, resulting in an insidious and clandestine infill that changes their character.
While working on the zoning issue, I discovered tangential problems having to do with the condition of our rental stock. These problems overshadowed the zoning issue in that the state of the rentals in Bellingham presents a public safety and health question which cannot be ignored, especially given our highly transient renter population.
The zoning problem still needs attention but licensing rentals will not solve it. There is work to be done on the zoning code itself, primarily in decriminalizing violations by making them civil infractions. The code also can be updated to include recent changes in law relating to the passage of R-71 on domestic partnerships. I fully support such revisions.
Those who purposely confuse these two issues in order to defeat the passage of rental licensing in Bellingham are doing a disservice to the renters of the over 17,000 units now in the market. Lack of rental licensing and inspection deserves debate on its own merits. To not do so would be a detriment to half our population who now resides in units about which neither the landlords nor the renters have sufficient knowledge regarding their safety.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Landlord Associations Support New Rental Inspection Law Passed in Olympia!
The Rental Housing Association, the Washington Multi-Family Association and the Washington Apartment Association all testified in favor of Bill 6459 - An Act Relating to the Inspection of Rental Properties that passed both houses of the Washington legislature during the current session. (Click here to read the bill or here to read the bill summary) Attempts by landlords to have legislators pass a bill prohibiting municipalities from requiring that landlords hire a third party to do inspections or assessing landlords or owners the cost of a rental inspection by a local government employee were not successful in 2009.
Although the present bill places restrictions on local governments (e.g. inspections of rental properties can only take place every three years), the overall effect of the legislation is to give a green light to cities throughout Washington State to launch rental housing inspection programs within the language of the bill. The bill also provide a civil search warrant authority, if needed, to determine the presence of "an unsafe building condition or a violation of any building regulation , statute or ordinance".
In short, inspections cannot be refused either by the landlord or the tenant. Noncompliance penalties can be assessed by local governments. False certifications are gross misdemeanors and violators may be subject to fines not to exceed $5000.
This persistent push for legislation by the landlords to limit or prohibit inspections has, ironically, morphed into an expression of approval by the State of Washington, likely weary of lawsuits by the landlords and their associates . The subject of rental licensing and inspections will probably come before the City Council again in late April or early May. Now our City Council has more than tacit approval from Olympia - it has a law. You can read some of my prior posts on this subject by clicking here, here, and here
Although the present bill places restrictions on local governments (e.g. inspections of rental properties can only take place every three years), the overall effect of the legislation is to give a green light to cities throughout Washington State to launch rental housing inspection programs within the language of the bill. The bill also provide a civil search warrant authority, if needed, to determine the presence of "an unsafe building condition or a violation of any building regulation , statute or ordinance".
In short, inspections cannot be refused either by the landlord or the tenant. Noncompliance penalties can be assessed by local governments. False certifications are gross misdemeanors and violators may be subject to fines not to exceed $5000.
This persistent push for legislation by the landlords to limit or prohibit inspections has, ironically, morphed into an expression of approval by the State of Washington, likely weary of lawsuits by the landlords and their associates . The subject of rental licensing and inspections will probably come before the City Council again in late April or early May. Now our City Council has more than tacit approval from Olympia - it has a law. You can read some of my prior posts on this subject by clicking here, here, and here
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Rental Home Fire- Possible Bad Wiring - Smoke Detector without Battery
Although this rental house fire took place in Blaine (read the story here) , the message to Bellingham should be clear. The city should create and pass into law a rental licensing and inspection program for the health and safety of the renters in our more than 17,000 rental units. Consider this:
1985 - A rental house on Laurel St. exploded and burned to the ground due to a gas leak. The WWU students renting the place had thought they smelled gas months before but ignored it. Luckily they moved out prior to the incident.
1995 - Six people lost their lives in a Meridian St. rental home that was equipped with smoke detectors that contained no batteries.
2009 - A fire caused by poor wiring destroyed a rental home on Tremont Ave. in the Guide Meridian/Cordata area.
In this latest instance the renter was saved by her dog. We cannot all have dogs, nor can dogs warn renters about mold, bad plumbing, lead paint, deteriorating structure issues or insufficient exits. Yet the landlords say we do not need an inspection program. That there are only a few “bad” eggs. That the city seeks to “punish” the good landlords. The truth is that even the good landlords are not experts in judging the condition of their homes.
These inspection restrictions are entirely arbitrary and impose on all cities in Washington State unjustified restrictions which work only to the advantage of the landlord. I urge you to write to your representative while there is still time to stop this bill in the House. Click on each name to send an email.
40th District
42nd District
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Open Letter to Students on Rental Licensing
Although it may appear to be counter-intuitive to some, students should be at the forefront of support for a rental licensing law in Bellingham. A recent editorial in the Western Front suggested that licensing, although having some merit, is not for the moment as these are difficult economic times. (Click here to read the editorial) The Zonemaven believes that the editorial board is short-sighted in its assessment of the situation. This myopia not only places the current set of students at continuing risk, but also inconsiderately condemns those future students who might otherwise arrive in Bellingham to a safe and secure rental market.
In spite of claims that licensing will bring about rent increases, the reality is that a fee of $30-36 (which is that suggested in a recent study on licensing prepared for the City Council) might, if the landlord chooses, add a mere $3 per month to a rental charge. This will fund the licensing program and salaries for additional code enforcement personnel. The price of a large mocha coffee per month is hardly an unacceptable amount given the prospect of increased health and safety protections that a licensing and inspection program would bring. The Zonemaven’s question to the students is: “How valuable is your well-being?”
For those who lament possible rent increases due to required, post-inspection repairs, one must remember that present rents paid by students and young workers are as result of such increases that have taken place over the last several decades. There is no free ride. Landlords have not been in the business of charity nor will they likely begin to act as such. I do not advocate price gouging on their part but there is a certain amount of overhead in keeping a rental clean and safe. Landlords run a business, which is precisely the reason their properties should be licensed, inspected and then brought to code. If a landlord is incapable or unwilling to maintain his or her rental property, then that landlord would do best to get out of the business and sell the home.
The editorial also implies that inspections are unnecessary in that the tenant has the right to call for an inspection at any time. This is true but places the tenant (that means YOU) in the position of being an expert on furnaces, mold, structural integrity of homes, plumbing and wiring or of being sufficiently informed to divine that there is even a problem. Does anyone believe that more than a handful of the 8,500 Western students (more if you include WCC and BTC), who seek housing here each year, even think about vermin, wiring or structural integrity?
Student renters in Bellingham number well over 10,000, if one takes into account those at Whatcom Community College and Bellingham Technical College. That is a potent political force. Use it! Why accept substandard housing? Why pay increasing rents in return for overcrowded and unhealthy living conditions? You, the students, are in a position to change the status quo. Tell the landlords and the city, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going take it anymore." (Thank you, Howard Beale) Tell the City Council that you expect Bellingham to control its rental housing stock and to make your home-away-from-home a peaceful, quiet and safe place to live. How much is your life and your health worth, regardless of the economic climate? At the time an accident occurs or a life is lost, what then will be the stance of the city government? Or of you, the students?
Write Mayor Dan Pike at mayorsoffice@cob.org. Write the City Council members at ccmail@cob.org. Tell them that you want to have safe housing not only now but for those coming to WWU, WCC and BTC in the future. Tell them you are also concerned about all the families of modest means who share the risks associated with being forced to live in an unlicensed and uninspected rental market. Yours can be a lasting legacy in this city.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Landlords' Attorneys Lament Licensing of Rentals
The Zonemaven recently received a paper submitted to the City Council by a law firm claiming to represent a “number of landlords” , not further identified, in the City of Bellingham. For the sake of all the landlords and renters in Bellingham, let us wish that the number represented is few, for they would be ill-served. The points surfaced by the attorney(s) are a mishmash of oft repeated e
xaggerations regarding rental licensing. You can read the paper submitted by the law firm by clicking on the images at the left.
xaggerations regarding rental licensing. You can read the paper submitted by the law firm by clicking on the images at the left.The initial lawyerly claim is that the licensing will “increase the cost of rentals” thus “decreasing affordable housing” and “create another unfunded layer of bureaucracy”. The Zonemaven is not amused by these canards and has stated so in the past. (Click here and here to read more.) It is difficult to imagine that a fee of $30-36 year to obtain a license (figures used to estimate total fees to the city per year) will, in any way, produce a crisis in rental costs. (Click here to read the estimates - see page 19) A fee at that level will bring in approximately $450,000, enough to fund an inspection program and hire additional code enforcement personnel. Even if the cost is passed directly to the renters, an additional $3 per month is insignificant, especially if one compares the money to the potential for avoiding a health or safety incident. Lest my readers forget, these are the same landlords who have, time and time again, raised their rents over the years, presumably for reasons having little to do with the health and safety of their tenants. Also not said is that the sharing of a house by 5, 6 or 7 people actually tends to push rents up. For example, seven individuals renting a single family home and who pay $300 per month, provide a gross income to the landlord of $2,100. How many large families needing affordable housing can match that rental? Likewise three renters in a small home, each paying $$350 would place that rental home out of reach of many small families of modest means.
Landlords whose properties are in good condition will see virtually no change in their expenses. For those landlords wh
ose properties are in questionable condition, they may be facing costs associated with bringing their buildings to standards which ensure the health and safety of tenants. According to the landlords' claims that these problem landlords are very few in number, the overall monetary effect of the licensing program should be minimal. Landlords cannot, at one end, claim that the licensing program will cause significant rent increases overall, if, at the other end, the number of units affected will be small as they have posited all along, e.g., “There are only a small number of problem landlords, so why punish all the rest”.
The attorneys also opine that any inspection program is either ineffective because of existing statutes or unnecessary, also because of existing statutes. So, they pronounce inspections ineffective in that the landlord must have a 48 hour notice prior to an inspection which will give her the time to clean up. This is true and it is a desired outcome. Sorry to say though, the attorneys have missed the fact that many deficiencies such as furnace condition, gas leaks, structural problems, mold, substandard or dangerous plumbing or wiring cannot be cleared up in 48 hours. Inspections are aimed at much more serious issues than cleaning up the dead flies and mice (which, by the way, can spread the Hantavirus through their droppings and subsequent unprotected sweeping of the droppings act
ually bringing about an infection).
They state that inspections are unnecessary in that the tenant has the right to call for an inspection at any time. This is also true but places the tenant in the position of being an expert on furnaces, mold, structural integrity of homes, plumbing and wiring or of being sufficiently wise to divine that there is even a problem. Does anyone believe that more than a handful of the 8,500 Western students (more if you include WCC and BTC) who seek housing here each year even think about wiring or structural integrity?
The attorneys’ paper continues with the assertion that licensing will not substantially have an impact on the abatement of nuisances. They take you down the false path of nuisances “are not limited to tenants only.” This is true and it is also irrelevant. Abatement of nuisances is not the sole rationale for landlord licensing. Moreover, other pressures come to bear with respect to owner-occupied, family homes, town houses and condominiums where there is more likely to be adult supervision and self-regulation in order to preserve the property as a family investment and to respond to the concerns of neighbors over nuisance issues.
To raise the issue of current laws on evictions as an impediment to rental licensing is likewise disingenuous. There is no reason for which a well-crafted rental licensing code in Bellingham cannot take into account issues that may have to be coordinated with the Revised Code of Washington. Rentals, whose history is that of ill-behaved tenants, have one common denominator, i.e., the landlord. These are individuals who time after time either fail to screen their tenants or who set up a scofflaw atmosphere by not adhering themselves to current codes on safety, health and zoning. This “Wink. Wink. Nod. Nod.” environment becomes the breeding ground for nuisances. Couple this with weak or ineffective code enforcement on the part of the city and you have created a symbiotic relationship (city/landlord) that exacerbates the problem and makes life miserable for neighbors and well-behaved tenants alike. There is no need to suspend licenses of such rentals immediately. A point system based on violations over specified periods can give landlords sufficient time to mend their ways and work with the city and the neighbors to eliminate problem renters before they even sign a lease. License suspensions then can be effected the end of leases, thereby preventing bad landlords from further leasing a property.
If on the one hand, we have no more than a handful of bad landlords, as we are told by the landlords themselves, then a licensing law will have little fiscal impact and costs to all concerned will be minimal. If, on the other hand, a licensing law brings to light substantial indications of a rental market gone bad in the areas of health and safety, we will have exposed a serious vulnerability that must be corrected regardless of the cost. To do otherwise would be foolhardy and dangerous.
Penultimately, the attorney(s) argue that existing codes, zoning laws and criminal codes are sufficient to address all the issues. Obviously, they are not sufficient. Even current codes do not provide for inspection of rental units. The city has no idea about the current condition of rental units in Bellingham. Given the potential impact of rental conditions on the health and safety of the community, for rentals to remain the only unlicensed business in Bellingham is unconscionable.
Lastly, the paper declares that rentals are centralized around Western Washington University and therefore a licensing program should not be required throughout the city but only in certain affected areas. (I guess they forgot that they just railed against rental licensing in the previous two pages.) I doubt if any such code, limited to rentals in a certain gerrymandered geographic area within the city, would survive a court challenge. Moreover, students, who are not the only renters in town, tend to live all over the city. See the WWU produced map of the student population in Bellingham by clicking here. The attorneys also forgot about the thousands of other potential renters from Whatcom Community College and Bellingham Technical College. One would assume they would congregate near their own schools.
Alas, the discussion of rental licensing is not at its infancy, in spite of the attorneys' claim to the contrary. This marks the 6th year since the issue was surfaced and debated at the Cruise Terminal. (Click here to read about that) In the interim, one heard nary a peep from the landlords such was their concern about "bad egg" landlords and nuisance abatement. There is a 26 page study on the issue of rental licensing that was made available and discussed on 7 December 2009 during City Council afternoon committee and evening general meetings. (Click here to read that.) We can continue to talk the issue to death or we can act before a tragedy befalls us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)