Landlord, tenant problem crackdown proving challenging in Columbia

The Capital City’s effort to regulate landlords and misbehaving tenants is proving to be complicated and contentious.

At the center of the debate is a proposed, multi-layered law that would, among other things, allow police to resort to charging the worst of the property owners with a crime of renting without a permit. Offenders also could land in a national FBI database, where police in other states would be able to detain them on Columbia’s warrants as they can with other criminal warrants.

The 10-page draft ordinance focuses mostly on absentee, out-of-town property owners. The proposal also seeks, after other failed attempts, to be able to identify those absentee landlords. Further, it would require landlords to pay fees to acquire rental permits and impose penalties for not complying with city codes.

Columbia’s chief code enforcer, David Hatcher, estimates that only about half of the 3,000 properties owned by absentee landlords have registered as they should under current law. That group is most likely to face punishment if the proposal becomes city law, its advocates say.

Another controversial provision would impose a penalty system that carries a $100-per-offense fee and ultimately could put chronic violators in jail for 30 days or put owners out of business if they don’t upgrade their properties.

Though the law would be called the “absentee landlord regulation program,” tenants also would be subject to violations, proponents say.

Police Chief Skip Holbrook said the crux of the proposal is to get landlords and tenants to keep properties safe, clean and welcome in neighborhoods, many of which have been complaining for years about trash, noise and other disruptions – much of it caused by student renters.

“From a development standpoint, we are exploding,” Holbrook said of Columbia’s surge in construction. “Now is the time to do this. There has to be some teeth for us to be able to regulate it.”

But many landlords complain the new laws are a government overreaction that seeks to make property owners responsible for their tenants’ mischief.

“Why don’t we deal with the problem – the tenants?” property manager Laura Nichols asked a City Council committee last week. “We really need to do a tenant permit.”

Paul Haynes called a property inspection provision “warrantless searches.”

Other requirements would be burdensome, he said. “I’m supposed to drive by the houses every day and check on whether they’ve put the trash cans back?” Haynes said of the proposal that points can accrue against a landlord for a range of repeated code violations, including how tenants handle trash pickup.

Holbrook and the police department’s attorney, Mike Hemlepp, say the draft ordinance has safeguards that protect individual and property rights.

Police, for example, cannot enter a house without permission or a warrant, Hemlepp said. The plan also contains steps to an appeals process for penalties. And only the worst violators would end up in court, they said.

Rental permits, penalties

Owners of larger rental complexes are not directly affected by the proposed changes because they already must have a business license to operate in Columbia, said Roger Myers, the city’s director of that division.

Business license procedures already provide ways to reach those owners, most of whom have local property managers if landlords are absentee owners, Myers said. Of the 290 licensed rental properties, 23 are owned by people or firms outside city limits, he said.

But no one knows for sure how many rental properties Columbia has.

Hatcher said he analyzed property assessment records to determine that about 10,500 properties are likely rentals because the owners pay taxes at higher assessment ratios than for owner-occupied houses.

“That’s an assumption,” Hatcher said, adding that his analysis is likely the most extensive the city has done. He calculated that 3,000 properties are likely owned by absentee landlords and that half of those have not complied with current registration requirements.

Holbrook is surprised at the lack of accurate statistics. “Nobody knows how many rental properties are in this town. That’s absolutely amazing.”

Among the provisions:

▪ Annual permits for landlords would cost $25. Failure to get a permit would carry a $400 penalty for each year the property was rented without a permit.

▪ Properties that fail a second inspection to meet codes would be subject to a $50 fee.

▪ But the provision that has drawn the most heat from landlords has been a six-point demerit system that would impose $100 penalties per point for violations of nuisance, animal control, trash, zoning, property maintenance and business regulation codes.

▪ Points also would accrue against rental permits if one or more written warning is issued in a 24-hour period. Two points would be assessed if a landlord is found guilty. Points would be dropped if the landlord is found not guilty.

The police department would issue a written warning after each point is assessed. Six or more points within 12 months would subject the landlord to a permit revocation, which could close the property to tenants.

Landlords may appeal to the city’s Property Management Board and later to the city manager. Further disputes could end up in city or state courts.

Stumbling blocks

Landlords, neighbors and some members of City Council are grappling with how to tackle the problems.

The city is getting a group of stakeholders to review the proposal.

The committee last week heard a litany of complaints from residents. Pat Gilmartin, for example, said she lives next to a duplex that is overgrown with vegetation, has furniture and other trash in the yard and has had no maintenance in 15 years.

District 1 Councilman Sam Davis said his constituents have complained for years about abandoned and dilapidated houses that are blights on neighborhoods.

“They are a repellant to growth,” Davis said of efforts to attract new residents and new businesses. “It needs to be dealt with quickly.”

Quick solutions are hard to come by because some city laws are loosely worded, going to court is slow and evicting tenants can be torturous, Davis and some of the more than two dozen people who spoke at last week’s committee meeting said.

Councilwoman Tameika Isaac Devine, who said she and her husband own three rental properties in the city, said she would like the proposal changed to require written notices sent to landlords before, not after, points are assessed.

She said other landlords have complained to her that they are being unfairly targeted.

Hemlepp, the police department attorney, said that only those who don’t address a problem would be affected.

“It’s going to be held against the landlord who ... doesn’t help us solve it,” he said.