City Council Bill 25-0141, brought to the floor by Odette Ramos, is seeking to make two material changes to City rental code that are over-stepping and borderline illegal.  Signing this petition will let the City know that we - as owners of correctly run residential rental property, can’t take anymore needless regulation. The changes sought are supposedly designed to eliminate “bad actors” as they say, but “bad actors” don’t license their rentals in the first place.  

SAY NO TO MORE RED TAPE!  

§ 5-7. Prerequisites for new or renewal license

“AN APPLICANT, INCLUDING THE RECORD OWNER AND ANY MANAGING OPERATOR, MAY NOT USE THE SAME RENTAL INSPECTOR OR RENTAL INSPECTION COMPANY TWICE IN THE SAME 8-YEAR PERIOD FOR THE SAME PROPERTY.”

Statement of Position:  Vendor selection for inspectors of rental dwellings pursuant to City DCHD code should not be influenced by the City any more than the State should influence selection of vendors to perform MDE LEAD certifications on the same.  If a vendor is licensed, they can be used.  The State issues the licenses and therefore the State can revoke them.  If the City wishes to influence, control or limit the use of independent vendors that owners use to perform services, than the City should hire, administer and run the rental inspection program in-house and that program should be free of charge to constituents as is the permit inspection program.  If the city doubts the credibility of State-licensed vendors, than the City should work with the State to monitor, audit or influence the same.  This amendment as its written, significantly undermines the credibility of not only the licensed inspectors, but also the owners of property being inspected, along with significantly increasing the administrative burden of having to hire; train; remit payment to; verify insurance for – multiple vendors.  Furthermore, because the average unit count of City licensed rentals will not materially change, but the number of licensed inspectors would have to theoretically double, the average experience level of the average inspector will be much lower, thus actually having the opposite effect of improving the quality of inspections.  Lastly, Councilwoman Ramos suggests because the City can’t regulate a State license, that the City will now have a separate license for home inspectors to inspect Baltimore City property.  JUST SAY NO TO BACK DOOR REGULATION!

Instead, it is suggested that the City create a process to investigate tenant complaints and audit any questionable rental inspection report.  This could include a combination of a few changes.  

1.     Rental inspectors could submit time/date/location stamped photographs of critical property conditions/elements, following along with the rental inspection checklist.  This would ensure that at the time of inspection, codes were met, similar to how Licensed Appraisers submit photographs of critical elements such as smoke detectors in a dwelling.  As you know we cannot prevent future breakage, failures, or tenant obstruction/modification since we do not occupy these units.  All inspections have always been and always will be “point-in-time.”

2.     Properties passing for a 2nd time would be allowed another bonus year before the next inspection which will be the compromise for the increased work/cost of item #1 above.

3.     DCHD shall establish a delineated process to address tenant complaints regarding code violations, and this process shall not, on its face, immediately cause the rental license to be suspended or revoked if the owner and rental inspector – under penalty of perjury, had no knowledge of the same.

§ 5-6. Prerequisites for new or renewal license – In general 

(B) DISQUALIFICATION. “A RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE MAY NOT BE ISSUED OR RENEWED UNDER THIS SUBTITLE IF THE PROPERTY’S MUNICIPAL WATER BILL REMAINS UNPAID 60 DAYS AFTER THE NOTICE REQUIRED UNDER § 9-724(C)(3) {“WATER SERVICE”} OF THE STATE ENVIRONMENT ARTICLE.”

Statement of Position:  The Municipal water bill should not impact obtaining a rental license any more than any other debt owed to any City agency.  We are asking for the time period to be at least 6 Months if this would be passed but our official position is this should NOT be passed at all.  Even a simple tenant turnover could cause a water bill to remain unpaid for 60 day’s time.  Tenants on housing assistance routinely fall behind on water bills for which owner’s are not reimbursed.  Water bills follow the property, but payment of the same should not impact a unit’s inhabitability or licensing of the same.  Billing issues are not DCHD Code violations.