A full presentation of the rental registration and inspection ordinance will be given by Crystal Surdyk, city development director, during the council’s March 18 meeting. Bill Reynolds, R-Ward 5 and Housing Committee chairman, said it is important to be ahead of the curve if the state is going to mandate rental inspections while reiterating the need to be more proactive with housing issues.

“It’s just crazy what we have allowed, what past administrations have allowed, to happen,” Reynolds said. “The rental inspection, we spent a lot of time on that part of it. We’ll work through the nuances of that and work on the details as we glean more information on what’s going to work and make it more expeditious instead of years and years like so many other government initiatives take.”

Crystal Surdyk, city development director, told members of the council’s Housing Committee that the proposal to inspect rental properties in the city still needs more work before it’s ready to pass, including more discussions with county officials.That means more opportunities for input from city residents with concerns.

The rental inspection ordinance would require rental properties to be registered with the city and to receive a certificate of occupancy. The registration form would include the address, name and address of all rental units on the property, name and contact of the current owner, a local contact representative, the name and phone number of the person a tenant can contact when repairs are needed and the date, location and type of violations for all units at the property for which the owner has been cited over the past two years.

Dean Golem, a city property owner, asks questions during Monday’s City Council Housing Committee meeting about a proposed rental inspection ordinance. P-J photo by John Whittaker

The program would come with a $50 fee to pay the costs of inspection and enforcement and a $25 reinspection fee. Failure to register would result in a fine of $50 per unit for landlords who don’t register within a year of the ordinance taking place.

“We’re just talking about the ordinances right now and what the legislation is going to look like,” Surdyk said. “We still have some work to do with the rental inspection ordinance. I don’t anticipate we will have it ready to be passed this month. This is open for discussion and to have this kind of back and forth dialogue. So questions, input, we are in that phase where we are taking all of that. When it comes to the logistics and how it’s going to work we are still working on what that is going to look like. We’re going to have to hire some part-time inspectors. We’re looking to partner with the county.”

Surdyk said state officials are in the process of creating regulations that would require all municipalities statewide to inspect rental properties, but enforcement of the regulation actually would fall to the county under drafts of the regulation local officials have seen. Part of the process now will include negotiations with the county on agreements for the city to help the county handle the inspections once local officials find out how much time they have to complete the first round of inspections. Surdyk said it is expected the state will give between three and five years for the first round of inspections to be completed.

“Hopefully it’s not an unfunded mandate from the state,” said councilman Jeff Russell, R-At Large and Public Safety Committee chairman.

“We have heard there is going to be some funding,” Surdyk replied. “But where it’s coming from and who’s going to get it we don’t know. There’s a lot left for that to be discussed.”

Two landlords attended Monday’s City Council Housing Committee to voice their concerns about the ordinance. Two city residents spoke in favor of the ordinances, particularly the rental inspection ordinance. City resident Bob Sisley questioned how landlords will be notified of an inspection. The ordinance states the city will give written notice at least 14 days before an inspection to the owner of the rental unit, the occupants of the property and the local contact representative.

Dean Golem, who owns one rental property on Allen Street, expressed his frustration with an ordinance that places the onus on landlords while the state makes it so difficult to evict tenants who don’t pay their rent or who damage property. He asked for further help with city laws that could help landlords.

“You have to give landlords rights,” Golem said. “We have no rights. It took me $10,000 to get a girl out, and she just moved out. … If you want to inspect my property, go ahead – it’s the best. I changed everything. I put everything top dollar in there. But when I go in front of a judge because she didn’t pay me 12 months rent, that hurts me.”

Surdyk said the ordinance isn’t meant to hurt landlords like Golem, but admitted situations like Golem’s are largely governed by the state and not the city.

“These ordinances are not meant to hurt landlords like yourself,” Surdyk said. ‘They’re not meant to hurt anybody. They’re meant to protect people. They’re meant to incentivize property owners to be good property owners, to be responsible property owners, to disicentivize the types of behaviors that you’re seeing along Allen Street while you’re maintaining your property. That’s really what these ordinances are meant to help us with. … There’s not a whole lot that we can do from a municipal level with legislation when it comes to tenant rights. We absolutely need to advocate for that, but that is going to end up being a state-level advocacy.”