Posted by Joey P SE AL on January 02, 1999 at 12:36:04:
Man…I can only imagine.
Well said, Daniel
Greeting from the land of the Communists! - Posted by Daniel Lubell
Posted by Daniel Lubell on January 02, 1999 at 24:59:12:
I am speeking about Moline Illinois, one of the Quad Cities, where I own property. Some City official wants to inspect every home in the area to determine compliance with the City building code, health code, plumbing code, electric code and mechanical code (which encompases everything). Unbelievable! Supposedly, he has a plan for a new approved temperature of 70 degrees. I suppose that if you do not keep your rental property at the approved temperature, you can be fined and have the building vacated.
And, get this… They have already sent out letters to everybody in the first targeted area (for inspections), both home owners and renters, telling them that an inspection will occur and if the resident does not let the building official in, they may be subject to an administrative search warrant! This “building official” has even posted signs in the area encouraging people
to call the City and tell on their neighbors if they are aware of code violations! Spooky!
This Tuesday, the City is having a meeting to discuss how to make City ordinances stronger so that it will be easier to get administrative search warrants! I can’t believe it, but I will be there.
Re: Greeting from the land of the Communists! - Posted by Gary Huron
Posted by Gary Huron on January 02, 1999 at 19:18:47:
In Wisconsin we have a minimum weatherization standard that a rental property has to meet. It’s called a DILHR inspection (Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations). You are given one year to comply. They (WI government) assume that your tenants are paying for their own heat and AC, and mine do. What the inspector will look for is either thermal insulated windows or storms, proper weather stipping around doors, the attic propertyl insulated and ventilated if accessable, places that may need calking or glazing, furnance inspection and proper insulation on hot water heater, most of it is common sense and should be done anyway. The only one that most people disagree with, the heating ducts have to be insulated where accessable. The landlord associations throughout the state are trying to get that part of the inspection removed. It has no benifit to the tenant.
You have the right to fight for your rights, you can do that in this country unlike China and Iran. Good luck and good investing.
Gary
Re: Greeting from the land of the Communists! - Posted by Sue (NC)
Posted by Sue (NC) on January 02, 1999 at 10:27:19:
The city council here in Raleigh tried to enact housing
laws requiring a heat system capable of maintaining a UNIFORM 68 degrees in rental units. A mayorial contender even ran with this as one of her pet issues. Thankfully, the proposition and the candidate were both
defeated. With radiators in one of our apartment buildings, we would never have complied with the UNIFORM part.
In our city, they never tried to address heating systems in owner occupied homes- they were just targetting landlords.
So the communists are knocking on our doors as well- lets just hope we can keep them out.
Re: Greeting from the land of the Communists! - Posted by Laure
Posted by Laure on January 02, 1999 at 08:17:00:
I live in Peoria, Illinois. We have had city inspections on Rental properties for about 3 years now. They were all gung ho at first, but have slowed down now. First of all Landlords have to “register” their rental property… cost $10.00. Then when/ if they inspect it, there is a $50.00 inspection fee. When the house passes inspection, you are awarded a rental certificate. Now I HATE govt. intervention. But it sure has cleaned up the slums. There have been a lot of properties on the south end tore down, and a lot of the drug activity has moved north and started to decay some of the “better” rental neighborhoods. As my personal experience, they have not required me to do anything that was not necessary. They do not require/ or have not for me/ new breaker boxes, furnaces, etc. They have made me fix steps, and have forced Tenants to keep their yards clean. I was “told” to paint a house, which I sided instead, but I took 2 years to do it…hehehe… little rebel that I am ! LOL
Overall, there has been moderation in the system here, and I am not unhappy that it is in place. It has gotten a lot of slum lords out of the business which leaves the rest of us with more opportunities !
Good luck with your challenge. Keep yelling at the city council meetings, and there should be a compromise that will be satisfactory !
HAPPY NEW YEAR ! oh, and stay inside ! 12" of snow here so far today… drifts are over my knees in the road in front of my house.
Laure 
The rest of the Peoria story… - Posted by Daniel Lubell
Posted by Daniel Lubell on January 02, 1999 at 10:15:47:
Laure,
In all fairness, you should tell the “rest of the story” as Paul Harvey would say. Peoria is a landmark city in it’s fight against rental inspections. Lew Nauman, of the Peoria rental asscociation, came and talked to our group just last year.
You mentioned “They (the City rental inspectors) were all gung ho at first, but have slowed down now”.
That is because many of the citizens have banned together and flat out refused to allow rental inspections! They have submitted forms to the City requiring an “administrative search warrant” in the event of a rental inspection. This has, to some degree, stopped the City cold.
No, we do not need annual rental inspections to get rid of slum lords! Ever since 1967 (I believe that is the year of Cammara v. the City of San Francisco), the Supreme Court has allowed cities to inspect slum properties with an administrative search warrant.
Peoria got so bad they actually used a battering ram to break down the door of one property, and all they found was a leaky faucet! Now, in Peoria, they need
two rental inspectors, plus a cop to do a rental inspection (unless you are a sheep and submit to the process).
Anyway, I suggest you join the Peoria rental association. They are responsible for a landmark case (I believe it was Tobin V. City of Peoria) which says that the “passage of time is not necessarily enough to justify an administrative search” which is a significant intrusion on people’s rights to privacy. By the way, this case (I hope I am quoting the right name) is on appeal now because in it, the court ruled the issue was not ripe for adjudication at the time of the decision. In a nut shell, the City had promissed not to do several harsh things to landlords and tenants, they had not done any of those harsh things at the time of the ruling, but have since done those things and they are being dragged back into court. By the way, this is a U.S. District Court case!
You mentioned that “they (the City) have not required me to do anything that was not necessary.” I am glad that this has been your own personal experience, but I don’t think you should need the City to tell you what you should do to your rental property or when to paint your houses. If you are looking for guidance in such matters, there are several excellent books available on this site, but it is not the role of government to TELL you such things.
Laure, this is not meant as a personal swipe at you, since I know you have not had a bad experience with these people. But, believe me, others have and you could be next. Join your local rental association and become one of the several other hundreds of landlords in Peoria that do not suffer rental inspections.
-Daniel Lubell
Re: The rest of the Peoria story… - Posted by Laure
Posted by Laure on January 02, 1999 at 19:33:07:
Thanks for the history… I was in the middle of a BAD Divorce (like any of them are good) when all this was going on, and actually was quite naieve to the whole deal. I WILL call and join ! Thank your for the extra info.
Sincerely,
Laure