Posts Tagged Legislation

WTMJ News Radio Discusses Proposed Legislation That Will Restrict Access To and Limit Information Contained on CCAP on Charlie Sykes Radio Show

Sep 17

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in CCAP, Rep. Marlin Schneider, Screening Tenants | No Comments

Thursday, September 17, 2009 was quite a good PR day for landlords.  Not only did the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel commentator Pat McIlheran publish a very good article criticizing the state and the city of Milwaukee for not treating  landlords like second class citizens but later that same morning Charlie Sykes spent a good amount of time discussing something near and dear to a landlord’s heart — CCAP

Sykes spent a large portion of his final hour discussing State. Rep. Marlin’s Schneider’s latest attempt to restrict access to CCAP and to limit the information contained on CCAP.

If you would like to listen to or download the podcast of Sykes’ discussion of this topic click here and then click on the entry entitled “Sykes Show part 3 – Thursday 9/17/09″

Tags: , ,

“Landlords Feel The Loathing” – Accurate Article On Landlords’ Plight Published in Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Today

Sep 17

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in CCAP, DNS, Investing In Rental Property, Legislation, Rep. Marlin Schneider, Residential Rental Inspection (RRI) Program / Mandatory Rental Inspections / Landlord Licensing, Screening Tenants | 2 Comments

Several weeks ago I received a telephone call from Journal Sentinel reporter Patrick McIlheran.  Mr. McIlheran told me that someone had referred him to my blog and after reading some of the posts that he wanted to speak with me as he was in the process of putting together a piece about how the state and the city seem to make the business of landlording more and more difficult.  I was more than happy to assist Mr. McIlheran as this topic comes up regularly during my interactions with clients, and at the the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin meeting.  Truth be told, most business – not just rental property owners – wonder why the city makes doing business here so difficult and unappealing.

After speaking with Mr. McIlheran, I referred him to a colleague of mine, Tim Ballering, owner of Affordable Rental Associates, LLC and past president of the AASEW.  Tim owns and manages hundreds of units in Milwaukee and has been a landlord almost as long as I have been alive (just kidding Tim ; ).  It goes without saying that Tim could give Mr. McIlheran some necessary background and perspective that I could not.

Mr. McIlheran’s piece entitled “Landlords Feel The Loating” was published in today’s paper.  You can also read it online at JSOnline.

It is a very good article. Please be sure to take the time to read the article and to email or call Mr. McIlheran and thank him for taking the time to present an accurate story on landlord’s present plight.  In light of the soon to be proposed Milwaukee ordinance that will require landlords to submit to mandatory inspections of the interior of their rental units, Ms. McIlheran’s article could not be more timely.

Tags: , ,

Milwaukee to Propose Landlord Licensing and Mandatory Interior Inspections of Rental Property

Sep 10

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, DNS, Residential Rental Inspection (RRI) Program / Mandatory Rental Inspections / Landlord Licensing | 20 Comments

The city of Milwaukee is planning on introducing a new ordinance that will require rental property owners in certain parts of the city to license their rental properties and submit to mandatory interior inspections by the Department of Neighborhood Services (DNS).

Many of the AASEW board members have been having regular monthly meetings with the new DNS Commissioner Art Dahlberg.  During a recent meeting Mr. Dahlberg informed us that in the near future he will be pushing for some form of residential rental inspection program (a.k.a “Landlord Licensing”) for portions of the city.  During a meeting with Alderman Bob Donovan it was confirmed that this program was in the works and that the city’s forthcoming budget already has money earmarked for the program.

Under this program DNS would target certain areas of the city which they consider to be “blighted” or which will soon become “blighted” if something is not done.  Other factors that would be considered in determining what areas to target would be the age of the housing stock, the percentage of rental units to owner occupied properties, and the history of complaints in the neighborhood.  Mr. Dahlberg indicated that the area of the city that would most likely be addressed first would be the east side near UWM due to the large number of illegally converted dwelling units and poorly maintained properties.

The goal of the program would allegedly be for the owners and the city building inspectors to work together to better the rental housing stock with the building inspectors becoming a resource for rental property owners.

While the specific details were not provided to me, any proposed program will most certainly contain provisions such as the following:

-  A requirement that all rental property owners in the targeted area pay a fee to the city for each unit that they own. 

-  A requirement that rental property owners allow the city building inspectors to conduct mandatory inspections of the interiors of each of their rental properties that are located within the targeted area.

-  If no code violations are found then the rental property would receive a certificate of code compliance which would allow the owner to rent out the unit for a period of time until the next mandatory interior inspection would be required.

-  If code violations were to be found in the rental property then the owner would be denied a certificate of code compliance (thus preventing the unit from being rented) until the violations were corrected.  Depending on the the number and severity of the violations, the rental property owner would be required to submit to an increased number of interior inspections during the ensuing months until the city would determine that the rental property was safe.

While this new program would only focus on the UWM area initially, other areas of town were also mentioned (the north side of Milwaukee for instance) as being targeted eventually.  It is fairly obvious that the end goal would be to have all rental properties within the city under this program.

I personally am not in favor of this program and I can’t imagine that many landlords would be.  If passed this new ordinance will be yet another regulation on rental property owners - a group that is already overly regulated.  I can’t imagine that tenants are going to enjoy this invasion of their privacy either.  Not to mention that the additional costs to landlords will most likely be passed on to the tenant by increased rents.  I also personally have difficulty with the fact that the city regularly threatens to cut the number of police, refuse overtime for police, eliminate the number of firemen at ladder companies, and close libraries, but yet they are willing to provide additional money for the hiring of more building inspectors.

While the alleged goal of this residential rental recording program is to improve the quality of the housing stock in the city I can’t help but think that it will also be a source of revenue for a city that allegedly is broke.

This proposed ordinance will be addressed in more detail in my future posts.

To read why this program is not a good idea click here.

To read the text of a study conducted by the LaFollette Institute in 2002 on whether or not Landlord Licensing should be implemented in Milwaukee click here.  To read a summary of the the study concluding that Landlord Licensing would casue more harm then good if implemented in Milwaukee click here.

For more information go to www.rentalinspectionprogram.com

Tags: , , , ,

New Bill To Be Introduced Requiring Landlords to Change Locks For Tenants In Cases Of Domestic Violence

Aug 10

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Legislation | 4 Comments

A new bill that would require a landlord to change locks for a tenant in cases of domestic violence is being shopped around for additional sponsors.  State Rep. Dexter and Senator Holperin have drafted a proposed bill, which has not yet been introduced, which would allegedly protect victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking by requiring landlords to change the locks of the victim’s apartment unit within 48 hours if certain conditions are met.

ADDED 8/31/09 — The bill has officially been introduced in both the Assembly and the Senate.  The proposed text of Senate Bill 274 (AB 400) is now available.

Specifically, the bill requires a landlord to change the locks of a tenant’s unit — or give a tenant permission to do so — if the tenant requests that the locks be changed and provides the landlord with a certified copy of  any of the following: (1) injunction order protecting the tenant or tenant’s child from the person, (2) a condition of release [from prison] ordering the person to have no contact with the tenant or the tenant’s child, (3) a criminal complaint alleging that the person sexually assualted or stalked the tenant or the tenant’s child, or (4) a criminal complaint filed against the person as a result of an arrest for committing a domestic abuse act against the tenant.

If the tenant supplies her landlord with one of the documents mentioned above and requests that her locks be changed then her landlord must change the tenant’s locks within 48 hours after receiving the request. 

The tenant will be required to pay for the cost of the lock change.

There will be an exception to the above which will come into play if the person who is the subject of the injunction order or criminal complaint is also a tenant living at the same unit for which the lock change is requested.  If that happens then the landlord will not be required to change the locks unless there is also an injunction that prohibits the tenant from entering the property of the tenant making the request or there is a condition of release [from prison] ordering the tenant not to contact the tenant that is making the request.

Since this legislation has not yet been officially introduced there is not a link to the actual bill yet available on the Wisconsin Legislature’s website.  When the bill is officially introduced I will add the link.

Tags: ,

State’s Budget Bill Amends Tenant Protection Act

Jul 22

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Evictions, Foreclosures, Legislation | No Comments

On June 29, 2009 Governor Jim Doyle signed the 2009-11 state biennial budget bill into law.  This law in part made modifications to the Tenant Protection Act (starts on page 108) which offers tenants certain protections during the foreclosure process.  My earlier post on the Tenant Protection Act can be read here.

Specifically, the state budget bill modified the current law related to tenant protections in foreclosure actions as follows:

1.      ADDED – If  an eviction action seeks to remove a tenant whose tenancy was terminated as a result of a foreclosure judgment and sale, the complaint must identify that the lawsuit is an eviction that is being brought as a result of a foreclosure action.

2.     ADDED – A tenant cannot be named as a party in a foreclosure action unless s/he  has a lien or ownership interest in the property.  The fact that a tenant lives in the rental property that is being foreclosed upon is not enough to name them as a party in a foreclosure action.

3.     ADDED – If a tenant is improperly named as a party in a foreclosure action the court shall award the tenant $250 in damages plus his/hers reasonable attorney’s fees.

4.     DELETED – The portion of the Tenant Protection Act that required the exclusion of any tenant information related to foreclosure actions from appearing on CCAP.   That section was replaced with #2 above.

Tags: , ,

AASEW’s Response to Rep. Schneider’s CCAP Legislation Can Be Found at www.DefeatAB340.org

Jul 20

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in AASEW, CCAP, Rep. Marlin Schneider, Screening Tenants | 5 Comments

For those of you that have been following my blog, you are well aware that State Rep. Marlin Schneider (D-Wisconsin Rapids) has introduced yet another bill attempting to restrict the public’s access to CCAP.  This new bill also will remove certain information from even being included on CCAP.  My prior blogs on this topic can be read here, here and here.

The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW), a collection of landlords and rental property managers, are strongly opposed to Schenider’s new bill which is entitled AB 340,  and have decided to do something about it.  The AASEW has created a web page that can be found at www.DefeatAB340.org or by clicking here, which contains links to the actual bill as well as links to your state senators and representative so that you can contact them and convey your displeasure with this bill.

Please visit the AASEW’s web page and consider contacting your elected officials to express your views as to AB 340.  You should also forward the link to anyone and everyone you know that may be affected by this legislation. 

If passed, this bill will affect more than just landlords.  Parents, employers, day care providers and more, will be unable to use CCAP without paying an annual fee and having their CCAP searches recorded by the state.  Additionally, you will be unable to learn whether a person has been charged with a crime, found liable in a civil lawsuit, or had an eviction action filed against them – until after the case has been resolved, which is often months or years after the action was filed.

The bill will also allow a person who has information contained on CCAP but which did not result in a convictions or judgment (even if this was the result of a stipulated dismissal) to remove all reference to that information from CCAP.  The concept of open records will be hurt severly should AB 340 pass.

Please do your part to insure that AB340 fails.

Tags: , , , ,

NEW LEGISLATION TO MAKE VICTIMS OF ABUSE A NEW PROTECTED CLASS

May 15

Posted by Tristan R. Pettit, Esq. in Fair Housing / Discrimination, Legislation, Protected Classes | 2 Comments

On May 14, 2009, Wisconsin Senator Spencer Coggs along with 7 other state senators introduced 2009 Senate Bill 204 entitled the “Victim Fair Housing Act.”

This bill will prohibit discrimination in housing on the basis of a person’s status as a victim of domestic abuse, sexual assault, or stalking. The bill also prohibits the owner of housing from requiring that a rental applicant supply information concerning the person’s status as a victim of domestic abuse, sexual assault, or stalking.

If passed (and there appears to be a great many co-sponsors to date) this bill will create an additional protected class in Wisconsin for victims of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and/or stalking with regard to housing. Discrimination in housing includes such actions as rejecting a person who applies to rent your property or causing the eviction of a current tenant solely because they are a member of a protected class. Wisconsin currently prohibits discrimination in housing based on a person’s sex, race, color, sexual orientation, disability, religion, national origin, marital status, family status, lawful source of income, age, or ancestry. Some municipalities like the City of Madison and Dane County have even more protected classes then the twelve mentioned above.

While I am not aware of any landlord that would refuse to rent to a victim of abuse in theory it is when that theory is dropped into the “real world” that sticky situations may arise. One concern I have is the fact that the abuser often follows his/her victim. This could pose noise and safety issues for the other tenants that reside in the same building with the abuse victim. What happens if the abuser shows up at the victim’s apartment banging on doors and disturbing the quiet enjoyment of the other tenants? Is a landlord allowed to evict the abuse victim/tenant in this situation? Or worse, what if the abuser shows up at the property and engages in criminal acts such as destroying the landlord’s property or assaulting other tenants who get in his/her way? Will the landlord be prohibited under this new law from evicting the abuse victim/tenant under this scenario? While I don’t think it is fair to evict the abuse victim in these situations I also don’t think it is fair that the other tenants and neighbors should have to endure such situations either. What is the landlord who is providing housing to that abuse victim to do? The landlord also owes his/her other tenants the right to quiet use and enjoyment of the property and to be free from criminal activity and harm.

Another concern is the fact that under the City of Milwaukee’s nuisance ordinances a landlord can be fined for having repeated calls to the police from the same property within a certain period of time. If the abuser should try to contact the abuse victim/tenant there is a strong probability that the victim will call the police (and they should). But under the nuisance laws, even if the police calls are legitimate, if there are too many of them the owner of that property may be fined. If the landlord doesn’t pay the fine it will be added to his/her property tax bill. While I have no supporting data, I think it stands to reason that a victim of abuse may need to contact the police more often than a non-victim of abuse

I don’t know what the answer is or should be. I certainly don’t think that victims of abuse should be discriminated against in housing but I also hope that the legislators, the police, the city and others that will be drawn into this dialogue will understand that there needs to be some protections or accommodations made to a landlord who may be stuck between the proverbial “rock and a hard place.”

Tell me what you think about this new legislation and how it might affect your rental properties.

Here is a link to view the press conference regarding the Victim Fair Housing Act.

Tags: ,