CRIME - Council members want landlords to pay for excessive police calls

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News : One Thread

Wisconsin State Journal

Council members want landords to pay for excessive police calls

Currently police can pressure landlords with the threat of taking over properties that harbor drug activity. But that is expensive and time-consuming, and it doesn't address police calls for other crimes, Ald. Matt Sloan said.

MARCH 29, 2001 By Dean Mosiman City government reporter

Irresponsible landlords should pay for excessive police calls to their properties, two Madison City Council members say.

The city should charge landlords for the cost of handling chronic police calls for disorderly conduct, battery, gunshots, drug use or dealing and other activities, a law being drafted by City Council President Dorothy Borchardt and Ald. Matt Sloan says.

After three nuisance calls in a month, the police would notify the landlord about crime problems and the cost of future enforcement, a draft of the laws says. The landlord could appeal the notice or offer an action plan to stop problem activities. If police calls persist, the police could calculate the costs of enforcement and add the sum to the landlord's next tax bill.

The proposed law will soon be introduced to the Public Safety Review Board, which will make a recommendation to the full City Council.

The law is intended to give police a tool to pressure landlords to deal with problem tenants, especially those creating drug-related problems, Borchardt and Sloan said.

"The Police Department feels it needs a tool to get landlords' attention," said Sloan, who represents the 13th District on the South Side.

Tenants, for example, have set up a drug trade in a 13th District property but the absentee landlord in San Francisco refuses to deal with the problem, Sloan said. "These people need to be evicted," he said. "The landlord needs to pay attention."

Cities such as Milwaukee and St. Paul, Minn., have similar laws, Borchardt and Sloan said.

Currently, police can pressure landlords with the heavy-handed threat of drug abatement, but that requires extensive resources and time to build a case before the city moves to force the sale of a property or take it.

The drug abatement process also can force out innocent tenants, and it doesn't help address chronic police calls for other crimes, Sloan said.

Noah Fiedler, executive director of the Apartment Association of South Central Wisconsin, said he supports the intent of the proposal but has concerns. The City Council keeps making it harder for landlords to screen tenants yet it remains difficult to evict people for anything other than lack of paying rent, he said.

"In theory, I think it's a great idea," Fiedler said. "But (the council) is trying to burn a candle at both ends."

Assistant Police Chief Noble Wray said police like the proposal in that it would encourage landlords to work on a solution. "Any time we have an idea that in some way encourages us to sit down with a property owner having problems and come up with a strategy to reduce the problems at that property, we're in support of it," Wray said. "If calls are escalating, there probably should be some consequences down the road."

Brenda Konkel, Tenant Resource Center executive director, said the idea of adding enforcement costs to the landlord's next tax bill means that the cost will be passed on to tenants in the form of higher rents. She also worried that the measure might make tenants leery of calling police for protection, as in a domestic abuse situation. "I'd hate to have it have unintended consequences," she said. "Tenants may be afraid to call police for legitimate reasons."

Staff writer Brenda Ingersoll contributed to this report.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2001

Answers

This is a two way street. Some good landlords would love to get rid of problem tenants but the landlord-tenant laws in their state says they have to follow a prescribed procedure to get rid of these people and if there is a lease it is even harder. It can take anywhere from a couple of weeks to several months depending on the state laws. This will also make landlords do even more extensive background checks before renting ( a major complaint of mine about invasion of privacy ).

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2001

I already gave up rental property because it was a bitch trying to rent to responsible people, and as Beckie said, sometimes hard to get them out. Looks like we're headed to all gov't housing.

Dennis

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2001


Bite your tongue Dennis! Don't even think that.

You may well be right, though.....

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2001


Nowadays they have a real quick search for unlawful detainers... and once someone has been slapped with one of those, no matter what the reason, they play hell getting anyone to rent to them again.

My last ex took up with this deadbeat, moved in with him, and two months later got evicted for not paying the rent. Almost 2 years later, she finally got someone to rent to her, and that was a friend of her dad's who still charged her double the normal deposit...

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2001


In my opinion, this is a catch 22 that stinks!

#1 - The tenants are responsible for their actions, not the landlords. If they are breaking the law, the police should enforce the criminal statutes and bring those responsible before the court.

#2 - This is a classic example of holding someone accountable for events without giving them the authority to control the events. If tenants rights laws are upheld, the landlord is legally prohibited from correcting the situation that they are, in effect, being taxed for. If they are really serious about the problem, then after notification, the landlord should be able to call upon the police to forceably evict the tenant within 24 hours.

#3 - This is another example of the lawyers tactic of going for the "deep pockets". Who is responsible is not the issue, who has the ability to pay becomes the target. At least one person in the article recognized the potential consequences. Increased rents and a chronic shortage of low rent housing are obvious results of this assault on the owners of these properties.

Seems like another short sighted government approach that treats the effects and not the causes. (Without first using the legal tools already at their disposal, either due to ignorance or sloth.)

GB7

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2001



Moderation questions? read the FAQ