[Mpls] app fees law -- send all tenants that plan ahead out of MPLS!

[Bill Cullen]

Greg Luce and the Mpls Observer have both posted on the new rental
application ordinance.  I don't have a problem with the ordinance as written
except for the part that ties the receipt of application fees to "available
units."

The current state law says a Landlord "may not charge an applicant a
screening fee when the landlord knows or should have known that no rental
unit is available." (1)  This is a significantly lower hurdle than the new
Minneapolis ordinance which ties screening fees to specific "available
units."

What should landlords do for the applicant that plans ahead?  Most rentals
are on a 30 day notice period. Therefore, landlords don't know what units
are available until 30 days before the move in date.

State law allows me to accept application fees unless I KNOW that "no rental
unit is available."  If I attempt to look into the future, say 1-Feb-05, I
am not sure what units are available.  However, given the size and history
of my buildings, it would be extremely unusual to not have a unit available
on 1-Feb-05.  Therefore, I believe that taking an application fee for
1-Feb-05 is legal under state law.

However, under this MPLS law, I must tie applications to "available units".
Since I don't know what units are available on 1-Feb-05, the only way I can
take an application for 1-Feb-04 is if I do one of the following: a)
identify a vacant unit today and commit to keeping it vacant until 1-Feb-05
or b) refuse to process the application until 1-Jan-05 -- leaving the
applicant in limbo or c) recommend the tenant applies at a building outside
of MPLS.  Which do you think I will do?  I will recommend all applicants
that plan ahead to apply at my buildings outside of MPLS.

Why not just require landlords to refund application fees if the applicant
meets the criteria specified and is not issued a suitable apartment (which
is what I do now)?  Folks, this is ridiculous.  Who thinks up these laws?

I hope R.T. stops this!

Regards, Bill Cullen.
Whittier Landlord.

(1) 504B.173 subdivision 1.



-----Original Message-----
From: Gregory Luce [mailto:gluce at project504.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 12:18 PM
To: TenantNet at mail-list.com
Subject: PJ504 Weekly: No. 9


Our weekly sojourn into journalism strikes again with the ninth attempt at:
www.project504.org/504WeeklyReport.htm.  We proudly present:

***TF'ED!
Minneapolis City Council committee deals the dreaded two-word blow to any
proposal:  Task Force. Proposed application fee ordinance gets TF'ed.

***HOUSING COURT STATS--
Two rent escrows, two ETRA's.  Three North, one South.  Who the four?

Plus, don't forget our online resources:

  Heat (And How to Get It):  www.project504.org/heat.htm
  Housing Codes: www.project504.org/housing_codes.htm
  October Event Calendar: www.project504.org/October2004.htm
  Free Legal Forms (approved by an attorney and that attorney's Mom!):
www.project504.org/legalforms.htm

Full Text of this Week's Articles Follow (full color PDF available at
www.project504.org/504WeeklyReport.htm)

***TF'ED!

	A committee of the Minneapolis City Council declined to vote
yesterday on the merits of a proposed application fee ordinance, instead
postponing a vote until a task force could be set up to study the proposal
and make recommendations to the committee at a later date.

	With Council Members Paul Zerby (DFL-Ward 2) and Don Samuels (DFL-
Ward 3) opposing postponement and creation of a task force, three other
council members on the committee took issue with potential conflicts with
state law as well as an alleged lack of engagement with local landlords in
developing the proposal.

	Committee member and Council President Paul Ostrow (DFL-Ward 1) took
issue with the ordinance's potential conflict with state law, which allows a
landlord to charge a fee for completing or obtaining a "personal reference
check . . . consumer credit report. . . or tenant screening report."

	Assistant City Attorney Henry Reimer told Ostrow and the committee
that the council would have to determine that a landlord's cost in securing
a personal reference check, credit or tenant screening report is no more
than $25.00, the amount the proposed ordinance sets as the cap on
application fees charged by local landlords.  Ostrow later stated that,
because of the potential conflict with state law, he would not support the
ordinance if it meant capping fees at a level below what it actually costs a
landlord to complete a personal reference check or obtain a credit or tenant
screening report.

  	While the postponement and creation of a task force is considered a
setback for tenants and their advocates, the ordinance's chief sponsor, Ward
9 Council Member Gary Schiff (DFL), vowed to press on.

	"Another government task force with no defined scope, membership or
timetable unfortunately delays justice for renters," Schiff said after the
hearing.  "Renters need access to affordable housing, not another study. The
City Council should take action to protect renters, not hide behind another
task force."

To view the proposed ordinance as well as state law, download it at
www.project504.org/ProposedOrdinance.pdf

***HOUSING COURT STATS--
Two rent escrows, two ETRA's.  Three North, one South.  Who the four?

	For the week of October 4 to October 8, Hennepin County's Housing
Court Division reported 157 case filings involving 262 different defendants,
including the ever-present John and Jane Doe. The Minneapolis Public Housing
Authority topped all filers with 24 cases- 23 of which alleged nonpayment of
rent and one which alleged a breach of lease.

	Tenants filed two rent escrow cases and two Emergency Tenant
Remedies Act (ETRA) cases.

	One ETRA case involves a duplex at 1100 24th Avenue North in
Minneapolis' Jordan neighborhood, allegedly owned and/or managed by landlord
Joyce Moore.  Another ETRA named Tyrone Springs as the landlord for a five
unit building at 2620 3rd Avenue S. in the Whittier neighborhood of
Minneapolis.  Springs subsequently filed an eviction proceeding against the
tenant, despite the initial ETRA.

	The rent escrows involve two separate properties in Minneapolis: a
16-unit building at 1814 Glenwood Avenue in the Harrison neighborhood and a
single-family rental property at 2401 24th Avenue North in the   Willard-Hay
neighborhood.  The tenant at the Glenwood property has named Redeemer Center
for Life as the defendant-landlord. Lawrence Hill is the named defendant for
the 24th Avenue North address.

Online Information & Forms Available

What's the difference between a rent escrow and a TRA case?
Need a rent escrow or ETRA fill-in form?