From Dick Conoboy, aka the “Zonemaven” over at the Twilight Zoning blog:
Perhaps it is time for a Rental Housing Commission in Bellingham which can be created in conjunction with a licensing program for rental housing. Recently, I received information that the city of Durham New Hampshire has created such a commission (click here to read the establishing code). The charge of this commission is “addressing and resolving on a continuing basis public policy issues associated with rental housing.”
Read his full post, right here.
Q: What do you think about creating such a governing body in Bellingham?
November 11th, 2009 at 10:26 AM
I like the idea of having a Rental Housing Commission, but I am very concerned by the idea of having a landlord licensing program. Why should the two be done in conjuction? I think there would be much more broader support for the creation of the commission than for the licensing program.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Dick Conoboy and the “neighborhood power” people can’t have it both ways. They argue that it’s impossible to enforce detached accessory dwelling units (mother-in-law cottages and carriage houses) — and yes there are illegal DADUs in Bellingham now — yet they spend all their time pushing for enforcement of an issue way more complex and nuanced. (Inventorying structures vs. licensing landlords and tracking what goes on inside residences, hm.) How about a compromise: create a housing commission as part of passage of the rest of the infill toolkit. The mandate of the housing commission would be to ensure mitigation of the (many false and alarmist) negative impacts of any housing policy. The housing commission will walk around town 24-7, lead by Zonemaven himself?, looking into backyards and peering into windows to ensure proper compliance. Best of all, with the housing commission enforcing all the housing laws around town this way, no one will be concerned about losing privacy from development of a couple backyard cottages in their neighborhood.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:36 AM
I feel strongly we should license landlords. I think it will help with neighborhoods w/ irresponsible landlords, will force the bad apples onto a level playing field with those maintaining their properties, and will provide revenue to the city.
How many landlords don’t adequately report their income? Does the city currently collect taxes - other than basic property taxes - from these businesses? If not, why are these businesses exempt from the taxes that all other businesses pay especially since they have an impact on police expenses.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Bhammer, what are your concerns about the licensing aspect? More than anything - that appears to be something that is progressing toward becoming a reality in the city.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:02 AM
I think if a licensing program goes through you will see many rentals owned by individuals go up for sale. Do we really want more properties on the market right now? Increasing the burdens to owning a rental will drive down peoples incentives or interests in owning a rental property. This would result in less choice for renters. Another possibility is that more of the rental properties would be owned/operated by rental management companies.
I’m for the commission because I think it would help mine, Suzie Q’s, and others concerns regarding irresponsible landlords (and tenants) and it would help to enforce policies and laws already on the books. It would provide a forum for concerned citizens to bring their complaints and have them be acted on and not ignored.
The licensing program would mostly be a money grab to provide additional “revenue” to the city.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Bellinghammer - if you’re for the commission, how would you pay for the staff members who have to work with that commission? Every government advisory body has a paid staff member who provides at least some of their budgeted, paid for time, and thusly tax dollars, to helping with the work. That can often include a secretary to take notes, etc. as well as expert staff who can advise on issues.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Seems like the commission could pay for itself through the fines it would collect from enforcement of current laws.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Bellinghammer - I’d be interesting in knowing how the city could be compensated for the number of police calls to rental units. I’m thinking mostly about excessive parties. Those rentals tend not to be owned by individuals but by the property management companies.
I think w/ licensing there could be a mechanism where owners are billed for police services above a threshold. Then my hope is the owners will work to fix the problem w/ the tenants.
Your thoughts? Would that work or is there a better way?
November 11th, 2009 at 11:48 AM
How would a citizen advisory board help to enforce policies and laws already on the books? I don’t think we should empower such untrained volunteers to have any enforcement powers. Leave that to trained, supervised professionals.
Bellingham already has an enforcement mechanism, one that does not require citizens snooping on each other: a single code enforcement officer within the police department. The problem is that his duties cover a wide range of areas and cover our entire city. One major argument behind landlord licensing is to charge a small fee to help fund a second enforcement officer. We don’t need to re-invent the wheel or invent new regulations to enforce, just find ways to enforce what we have.
Bear in mind that nearly half of all Bellingham residents are renters (this is not just a college kid issue). Given the huge number of renters, the landlord fee could be as little as $5-10 per bedroom unit per year, and still generate enough to pay for program overhead and a second full-time employee. Done modestly, it should be a very small additional cost, straining neither landlords’ or tenants’ pocketbooks. It’s a reasonable cost of doing business, and it would benefit and protect good landlords from problems created by a small minority of problem landlords.
November 11th, 2009 at 12:49 PM
First regarding Michael’s snooping comment. I see this commission as providing a better mechanism for responding to citizens complaints to be heard and acted on. If residents have an issue they could take it before the commission and not burden an enforcement officer to handle. It’s a complaint driven system. Seems like it would streamline the process for handling these types of issues.
November 11th, 2009 at 1:03 PM
Bellinghammer - but wouldn’t the enforcement officer still have to be involved? So why put a commission in the way? I’m truly enjoying your thoughts on this topic. so thanks for expanding all the much more.
November 11th, 2009 at 1:22 PM
The main complaint about rental housing–disorderly behavior by student renters–would be solved if the rooming houses were rented out the old way, as it was when I went to Western. One person rents the house, then advertises, screens potential tenants, collects and pays the rent in one check to the owner of the house. That main renter, like any person who rents a house and doesn’t rent out rooms, must answer to authorities for noise and other violations. That person has to enforce the rules among his roommates, right along with other house rules, such as “it’s your turn to mow the lawn.” Think of all the money the city will save when every incident doesn’t require a police response, complete with follow up calls to property managers.
With property management companies in charge, no one is responsible for preventing disturbances, no one person reports needed repairs to a homeowner, and no single renter cares about the place because he/she just “rented a room.”
As for licensing, this sounds to me like the City can’t think of any more ways to squeeze revenues from people who drive downtown, so they want to hit up the landlords. If you own a home, and the zoning is right, you shouldn’t have to ask permission to rent out all or part of it. Never have befpre but, in these days of no more rights and diminishing privacy, I guess it seems logical to some people. Costs, of course, will pass through to the tenants, just as the rental tax already does.
Give it up, City–we’re in a deep recession here and you aren’t helping. Go tow some more cars, why don’t you?
November 11th, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Good points Sharon. The only part where you missed the mark is that this is not an idea the City of Bellingham came up with. They wouldn’t even be considering it if not for folks like Dick Conoboy. At the very least, someone needs to do a study to see how many renters/rentals are actually these supposedly nuisance boarding houses around WWU. The majority of people rent in Bellingham. The majority of people in Bellingham are not WWU students.
November 11th, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Can’t–
That logic didn’t work when the City passed their rental tax a few years ago. They wanted the bucks.
November 11th, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Sorry Sam I don’t have much more to add. Just saying that in general I think there is some usefulness to a rental board given the percentange of rentals in Bellingham. Would need to see the specifics of what the said board would do, but seems like theres some merit there. Also, in general, I’m against the idea of a licensing fee because it would be applied to all rental owners and would cause some to get out or rethink their landlord status and would invariably be passed down to tenants in the form of higher rent. Does the city really want to be responsible for raising everyone’s rent?
November 11th, 2009 at 3:43 PM
Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, Bellinghammer!
I’m curious what a rental board would do, too. Perhaps Dick will share some more thoughts here.
November 11th, 2009 at 6:01 PM
I say no. From Zonemaven, I don’t exactly understand what the need for it is (other than ‘there are other commissions for other things but not this thing’), and it certainly doesn’t justify any added expenses.
I have rented in Bellingham, many members of my family have rented/are renting in Bellingham, and many of my friends have/are also. I never witnessed nor heard of anything that not only could have been solved with what already exists but would require a special renting commission to solve. Zonemaven doesn’t explain what situations would require or be improved by the added expense and hassle of a rental commission, so until something comes up I don’t see why we would need it.
November 11th, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Heaven forbid anyone have an incentive to rent to Western students, who are already facing constant huge tuition hikes, and who attend an institution that provides tons of jobs, income and culture to the city! Wouldn’t it be wonderful if there were even fewer places in town that they could afford to rent, close enough to the school that they could afford to commute to class?
I don’t understand why WWU students are so often demonized in these discussions.
November 11th, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Especially since “WWU Students” so frequently seems like code for “citizens aged 18-24.”
November 12th, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Like the other several dozen task forces and commissions in Bellingham, a Rental Housing Commission would be created to advise, educate and communicate. I would suggest that those commenting here actually read the Durham, NH municipal code which established their commission. You can access that document through my blog. You will note upon reading this code that the commission has no enforcement powers. Those powers are left to the police and code enforcement personnel. Here in Bellingham, the Parking Commission, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee and the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, to name a few, have no police or enforcement duties - nor would a Rental Housing Commission.
Additionally, such a commission would not replace licensing of rental properties which is a program to regulate rentals. Fees from licensing would go toward the salaries of enforcement personnel or a staff member for a commission. I understand that such fees must be in line with the need for enforcement or administrative personnel and cannot be used as a “money grab” by the city to pay for other, unrelated budget items. Note that rental licensing fees would likely be on the order of $50 per year, hardly a show stopper for the landlords. Why should rental housing be the only unlicensed or uninspected business in this city?
November 14th, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Should WWU be required to build a new Dorm every once in a while?
Why should they shift low income student housing costs onto the rest of the City?