Table of Contents
Why Does Vallejo Need a Rental Inspection Program?
Vallejo's Economic Vision Process
Vallejo Rental Program Components and Accomplishments
Rental Housing Inspection Programs in California
Table of Rental Inspection Programs in California
Case Study of a Vallejo Rental
Questions and Answers
Back to FBP Home
|
BLIGHT "This is a very self-conscious effort at social enginering to get us on the train of economic revival in California," said Claudia Leed, a deputy city attorney, who also said the push against lbight dovetails with city projects to reduce cimr,e draw technology jobs and create housing downtown. |
Vallejo's Economic Vision came about through a series of meetings with community leaders, including civic entrepreneurs, elected officials, municipal professionals, education and health care, business and industry, tourism, neighborhood and environmental leaders. The participants developed an economic vision based on the principle that a vibrant economy is necessary to achieve a healthy, proud community and a high quality of life. The vision confirms and reinforces the need for community partnerships to address the human, social and infrastructure needs of Vallejo as it moves toward economic sustainability. The number one priority of the City Support Structure subcommittee of the economic vision process is to develop and implement a comprehensive program to ensure code compliance for rental property and landlord accountability. With the Economic Vision Process determination that improving rental housing was a high priority of the City, a preexisting group, already looking at rental housing, was asked by the City to develop a solution. This group, comprised of the Chamber of Commerce, rental property interests, realtors, community members, Fighting Back Partnership, and others, had been meeting for over a year prior to the Vision process recommendations. The Rental Property Sub-group has been meeting for over two years developing a rental program that reflects the interests of all interest groups on the committee. This is to be accomplished by developing, passing and implementing a new city ordinance that would, in part:
Myriad benefits that would contribute to cleaner, safer neighborhoods are expected to result from the implementation of a rental inspection ordinance, and include:
|
Rental
inspection programs are designed to accomplish three main goals:
Various city agencies and
community organizations have identified sub-standard rental housing units-single,
family dwelling and multiunit complexes - containing significant health and
safety issues in different parts of the city. The scope of these problems range
from boarded windows, fire risks, gas leaks, non-operable heaters, open sewers,
lack of smoke detectors, illegal garage conversion, structural and wiring problems,
and other hazardous conditions.
Landlords
who are unwilling to voluntarily address identified health and safety issues
tend to be more responsive to pressure from the city. But laws currently on
the books make access
to inspect potentially problematic rental property extremely difficult entirely
reactive to the most severe problems that, for one reason or another, come to
the attention of the city. Tocomplicate matters, many tenants are reluctant
to
complain to the city about problems out of fear of retaliation or eviction.
Health and safety problems
in rental property deserve proactive action on the part of the city to ensure
that tenants have safe, quality housing rather than waiting until the problem
escalates and a complaint is filed.
| Vallejo Rental Program Components and Accomplishments |
The mandate that emerged
from the visioning process resulted in 18 months of hard work by a group of
about 15 individuals to create a rental property program for the City of Vallejo.
The Vallejo Chamber of Commerce, rental housing interests, Realtors, neighborhood
groups, Fighting Back Partnership, Vallejo Police Department, Vallejo City Attorney's
Office, and Development Services have all helped to design a program to address
problem rental properties and their negative impact on neighborhoods.
The rental program, as
it is presently designed, contains three components: community and rental property
owner education, an inspection process, and property management company incentives.
Specific questions about
the program concept, posed during a Vallejo Rental Property Roundtable meeting,
are included in a written question and answer format at the end of this document.
L.A. Anti-SLum Ordinance is Upheld
|
|
1. Community
and Rental PropertyOwner
Education
Training is currently ongoing in Vallejo through the Rental Housing Association and the Vallejo Police Department. The latest tenant screening seminar, for example, provided by the Vallejo Police Department, Beat Health Unit took place on February 3, 2001. |
Mayor Won't Back Citywide Rent Control Along with the Vallejo Chamber of Commerce and Fighting Back Partnership, Intintoli said he's developing a city ordinance and rental inspection process to curtail so-called 'slum lords' who let their properties degrade. |
Concord Gets Tough on Rental Repairs
|
|
|
BLIGHT State law gives cities the clout to clean up private property whose conditions mocks community standards. |
Rental Housing Inspection Programs in California |
Many communities
in California have residential rental housing inspection ordinances. Aside from
fire inspections, which are common in many communities, a number of communities
impose additional inspection programs and fees, generally administered by a
locality's housing, building, or health department. Under these programs, housing
inspectors examine the building's structure, look for interior plumbing problems,
heating and mechanical problems, and electrical and zoning violations.
The purpose for these ordinances is threefold, according to the California Apartment
Association
With the growing number of renters
in California, local officials and fair housing advocates want to ensure that
property owners are providing their tenants with safe and adequate housing.
Many local officials have become
involved when concerned citizens and tenants complain about rental property
owners who ignore or are unable to deal with neighborhood crime and blight.
Inspection programs are a source
of funding for localities. Owners are charged for an initial inspection and
are again charged when violations are found.
The right
of cities to charge rental property owners for inspections was upheld by the
California Supreme Court on January 9,2001. In the case of Apartment Association
of Los Angeles County, Inc., et al. vs. City of Los Angeles, the Court found
that a city ordinance imposing an inspection fee on private landlords does
not violate article XIII D of the California Constitution, added by initiative
measure, Proposition 218, in 1996. The decision affects cities throughout
the state that either have similar rental inspection fees or are considering
enacting them.
Examples of the types of rental inspection programs that have been adopted
by California communities are shown in the following table for the cities
of Azusa, Berkeley, Hayward, Los Angeles, Montclair, Pasadena, Sacramento,
and San Francisco. The oldest rental inspection ordinance was adopted in 1973
by Pasadena; the most recent was Los Angeles in 1998.
Rental
Housing Inspection Programs in California
| City | Units Covered | Registration fees | When Inspected | Inspection Fee | Reinspection Fee | Cost per Violation |
| Azusa | All rental units | Annual fee: $50 single family $25 condo $50 apts +$4 per unit |
Annual | None | If violation found | Timeand cost accrued by city |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Berkeley | Apartments | No | Annual for fire and Buildings | $30 for building if violation $100/hour for fire inspecton |
None if violation is corrected | N/A |
| Hayward (adopted in 1989) |
3 or more units/parcel | no | Annual | None | $50 - $10/unit | $50 |
| Los Angeles (adopted in 1989) |
Rooming houses, residential hotels, apartments, lodging houses | No | Annual | $12/unit | N/A | N/A |
| Montclair (Includes 5-star rating incentive) |
Apartment buildings | No | Voluntary | No | No | N/A |
|
Pasadena |
All residential units | No | Buildings with 3+ units every 4 years. Single family homes/duplex when change in occupancy |
Annual fee $5.50 - 3+ units $77 - single family homes $63 - condo |
Only returns if life-threatening $22 - 3+ units |
N/A |
| Sacramento (adopted in 1984, 1987) |
All apartment buildings inspected by fire dept | No | Annual | Annual fee $30 - 3-5 units $60 - 7-15 units $100 - 16+ units |
N/A | N/A |
| San Francisco |
Apartment buildings with 3+ units | Annual $92.50 <20 units $117.50 for 20-29 $155.50 for 30-39 $205.75 for 40-49 $285.50 for 50-59 $335 for 60+ |
Annual | No | N/A | N/A |
As an Outreach Worker in the Neighborhood Revitalization Program, I recently told my spouse about a particularly troubling situation that I came across this winter. The situation involved four family members living in substandard housing conditions in the Downtown Revitalization area, and to make matters worse, these tenants were being subjected to an unreasonable rent increase from a negligent landlord. Try to imagine that this family of four, which includes a 4-yearold boy and a 2-week-old infant, living in an apartment that is plagued by no heat, a leaky roof and layers of mold and mildew throughout the apartment.
Then try to imagine that this same family has to endure a rent increase from $475 to $600 by the landlord, who by the way, assured the family that the aforementioned problems, along with several others, would be fixed within a month of the family's residency.
Yet as the family enters its third month of living at the apartment, the landlord has not delivered on any of his promises to fix the substandard conditions.
The plight of this family came to light on January 10, 2001 when we were conducting informal neighborhood surveys at a multiple unit apartment complex in the Downtown Revitalization area. We were given permission by a tenant to come into his apartment and conduct the survey.
Once inside, we observed that this was a studio/one-room apartment shared by the husband, wife and their two children. During the course of our survey, we also observed that the only source of heat inside was the gas-operated stove at the west end of the apartment. This stove had to be lit with matches because the pilot light was not functional. Furthermore, there were no smoke alarms located in the apartment.
In addition, we observed that there was water damage throughout the apartment ceilings and walls. The ceiling in the kitchen was damaged to the extent that plaster had begun to fall to the floor. The kitchen wall has, in places, started to separate because of water damage caused by the leaky roof.
We also found heavy layers of mold and mildew concentrated throughout this apartment. It should come as no surprise, then, that the 11-year-old child that lives in this apartment suffers from severe asthma. Mold and mildew in home environments is considered an aggravating factor for respiratory allergies, as well as a cause of damage to building materials and we as outreach workers, are seeing firsthand how apartments with mold and mildew issues are impacting our children's health.
The bathroom in the apartment presented its own list of problems. There is no ceiling exhaust fan or window in the tiny bathroom. The wood above the bathtub in the bathroom is completely rotted and constantly absorbs moisture.
After talking to the husband of the family about the litany of problems,
he stated that his family had lived in the apartment for seven weeks and
in that time, had their rent raised from $475.00 to $600.00 a month.
The tenant informed us that the landlord promised to clean the carpet,
fix the stove and install a fan in the bathroom within the first month of
their residency. To date, not one problem has been corrected.
Both
the husband and wife tenants have stated that they deplore living in substandard
conditions. However, they are fearful of getting evicted by the landlord
if they continue to complain about anything related to the apartment.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED BY THE VALLEJO RENTAL
PROPERTY ROUNDTABLE GROUP
1. Why is this
program necessary? There is enough sub standard housing to warrant the
program and to improve quality of housing stock in Vallejo.
2. Will the inspections
be similar to Section 8? Yes.
3. Will owners
be allowed to attend the inspections? Yes.
4. Will there be
a charge for the inspection? Probably.
5. Will the owner receive some sort of documentation verifying the passing of the inspection such as a Certificate of Letter? Yes.
6. How long will the
owner be given to correct the problems discovered during an inspection?
24 Hours to 30 Days, depending on the nature of the problem.
7. Will Section
8 properties have to endure two inspections or will the program accept the
inspection done by Section 8 Housing Specialist? Section 8 inspections
will be accepted.
8. Who will be
doing the inspections? Code Enforcement with additional Code staff.
9. Why is this
a citywide program instead of just for identified properties? Only a
small percentage of the worst properties will ever come to the attention
of the City ... .leaving many properties in need of correction for health
and safety violations. And, problems exist in all areas of the city... not
just one section of town.
10. How will you generate
a database for all the rental properties in Vallejo? Metro Scan managed
by Code Enforcement.
11. If a property passes
an inspection will the program re-inspect if there is a complaint made?
No. There is an existing process for handling complaints through Code
Enforcement of the Building Department.
12. Will there be a process for complaint-generated inspections? No.
13. Will the program
get involved during a sale? No
14. Is the inspection
involving inside, outside or both? Inside.
15. How does the program
plan to handle a situation where the tenant refuses entry or fails to keep
an appointment? If a tenant or landlord refuses to provide entry, the
City would be required to obtain an inspection warrant.
16. Will the program
guarantee an inspection requested by the owner after repairs between tenants?
This could happen by request of the owner.
17. Has the committee
investigated any other alternatives to this all encompassing one? Yes,
the committee has had considerable discussions about this program and found
this mode would address Vallejo's issues.
18. Will business
licenses be needed for every single family home (if a person owns more than
1 unit) or will there be one business license and a per unit charge after
that as there will be for complexes? The business license issue is not
part of the deliberations of this committee. The City is exploring business
licenses independent of the rental program.
19. What is intended
for non-complaint owner occupied? This is not an issue for a rental program.
Other city ordinances address owner occupied problems.
20. Has the committee
looked into the possibility of a lawsuit as a result of their inspection?
Yes, the City Attorney's office has indicated that with the new California
Supreme Court ruling on the legality of rental inspection programs, that
if carefully drafted the program will withstand any potential lawsuit.
21. How will the
program handle tenants who work and are unable to attend an inspection during
the day? Inspectors may be able to take flex time and work on Saturdays.
22. Will there be
consequences to the owner if a tenant fails to keep the appointment or refuses
entry? If all avenues of voluntary cooperation are exhausted, the City
would be required to obtain an inspection warrant to obtain entry. This
is a much more routine process if the City has an inspection process on
the books.
23. Who is responsible
for "opening the door" for the inspector? (Keeping in mind that an owner
will not have a legal right to enter). The Landlord with tenant pernussion
or the tenant.
24. Will the program
be responsible for noticing both the tenant and the owner? Yes, notice
to the Owner with a copy to the "Occupant".
25. Will there be
legal protection for an owner whose tenant is uncooperative? (i.e. a
tenant claim for retaliatory eviction). If the owner has done their part,
the City must take responsibility for gaining entry.
26. What are the
ramifications of not passing the inspection? The owner will be told
to do the repairs within a reasonable timeframe, depending on the severity
of the problem. If the repairs are not done, fines will be imposed.
27. How will tenant
caused conditions be handled? The Inspectors will notify the owners.
28. Will the Inspector
document tenant caused conditions such as tenant neglect or poor housekeeping?
Yes, especially Health & Safety issues, including filth.
29. How did this
program come into being? The number one priority of the City Support
Structure subcommittee of the economic vision process is to develop and
implement a comprehensive program to ensure code compliance for rental property
and landlord accountability.
This is to be accomplished by developing, passing and implementing a new
city Program.
30. What jurisdiction
will the program fall under (Beat Health, etc.)? Code Enforcement.
31. What will be
the fine structure? Fines will be consistent with current policy: Currently
the process calls for a warning, then move to the following fines in sequential
order--$250, $500 and $750.
32. Will the program
be concerned with who does the repairs? Can an owner do their own work if
they choose or have a handyman, etc.? In some cases a permit will be
required (yet to be determined what will need permit). In non-permit situations,
inspectors primary concern is for problems to be abated.
33. Will the owner
be required to pull permits for minor repairs? This group is not recommending
any additional permitting as a result of rental inspection above what already
exists in the City process.
34. Has the committee
looked carefully at other cities that have had a similar program and investigated
how successful they have been? Yes, review of strengths and weaknesses
has been done and continues as new programs come on line.
35. How often will
inspections be made? Depends on how well the first inspection went.
If very few problems, according to the point system, then re-inspection
could be as long as five years later.
36. Will you refer
an illegal unit to the building inspector? Yes.
37. If drugs are observed, will VPD be informed? It is possible, it depends on the nature of what is observed. For example, a bathtub full of methamphetamine may create more concern than a marijuana pipe.