Shawn Parsons thought he had done his research.
Before he offered a lease for his Fells Point home to a prospective tenant, he reviewed her credit and checked her references.
But after that tenant wrote bad checks, sublet the place without permission and damaged the property, he wanted to warn other landlords not to trust her.
The consumer protection division of the state attorney general office offers a brochure with more information for landlords and tenants, available online at www.oag.state.md.us/consumer/landlords.htm. Paper copies can be requested by calling 410-576-6500 or 888-743-0023.
"If we could have found out anything about this, it would have saved us $17,000 and seven months of [those] people renting the property," Parsons, of Fallston, said. "It brought so much stress into our lives."
Parsons posted some details about his experience on donotrentto.com, a two-year-old Web site that compiles information about problem tenants so renters can make better decisions. For a $14.99 annual membership, landlords can search the database by name to gauge whether others have experienced problems with an applicant.
The Web site reflects how tenants and landlords are turning more to the Internet to check each other out. Apartment-hunters can also visit various Web sites for reviews of buildings and complexes.
But sites such as donotrentto.com also raise concerns among consumer advocates and tenants about potential misuse. Unlike credit reports, now routinely checked during the application process, such sites are not part of a regulated industry and lack an approved system for verifying claims and appealing inaccuracies.
"You just can't put things out there for people to slam somebody or mess somebody over," said Stephanie Cornish of Baltimore Neighborhoods Inc., a group that assists both landlords and tenants.
And privacy experts say this sort of Web site presents potential problems of misidentification or identity theft that are characteristic of the Internet age.
"We're creating all kinds of new information infrastructures but all too often without any checks and balances," said Jay Stanley, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty Program.
Joseph Collins, the managing partner of donotrentto.com, said the site helps landlords protect themselves and their property.
The inspiration for the Ann Arbor, Mich., company developed after a group of landlords there met and realized they had similar problems with tenants.
"We said to ourselves, 'We can't be the only ones going through these issues,'" he said.
Collins said that he had just evicted a tenant who vandalized his house in addition to stealing the refrigerator, the stove and the front door upon departure. "I spent $7,000 just to get it back in rentable shape," he said.
Credit reports aren't fail-safe, because sometimes people don't have a credit history. "You don't really know the extent of the person until you speak to their previous landlord," he said.
But what if a prospective tenant lies and provides a relative's number when asked for references?
"There are thousands of good tenants out there, but one tenant could cause you devastation with the amount of damage they could do to your property," Collins said.
Thus far, landlords across the nation and even a few internationally have entered the names of hundreds of tenants, including one from Spain, he said. There are about 25 Maryland tenants, he said.
Landlords can try to evict tenants through the court system, but if the person leaves without paying and leaves no forwarding address, landlords have no recourse, he said.
"A lot of people pretty much drop it," he said. As a result, he added, credit reports "might not show anything, because a landlord was not at a financial state where they could get all this prosecuted."
Property owners or managers can describe their renter problems and even upload photos of damage. The "add tenant" form asks for the last digits of a person's Social Security number or driver's license number, to help differentiate among people with common names, Collins said.
Right now, you don't need to subscribe to enter a listing about a tenant - only to search for a name.
Landlords must enter an e-mail address but otherwise are not required to confirm that they own and are renting property. If a tenant calls to report erroneous information, "normally I take care of things within 24 hours," Collins said.
The consumer protection division of the state attorney general office offers a brochure with more information for landlords and tenants, available online at www.oag.state.md.us/consumer/landlords.htm. Paper copies can be requested by calling 410-576-6500 or 888-743-0023.
But how do people know if something is posted on the site about them?
"If they want to find out if somebody enters something, sign up and get all the privileges," he said. "We don't restrict tenants from becoming members."
Rebecca Bowman, a Maryland assistant attorney general, said the Web site creates the potential for libel but otherwise does not violate laws.
Landlords should be very careful about the information they post about a tenant. "As long as it is accurate and you have documentation of it, you don't have a problem," she said.
Bowman said such sites might be "helpful to look at, but you need to take everything with a grain of salt."
"Certainly all of this gives me pause, whenever there's information out there that's being kept on people that they don't know about," Bowman said. On the other hand, "there are many, many, many kinds of these things out there. I don't know that this is any better or any worse."
She pointed out that the network relies on people submitting information.
"All of that is based on the credibility of the people posting," she said.
Prospective tenants turned down for a rental should ask why, she advised.
Cornish, of Baltimore Neighborhoods, said tenants have more recourse when landlords take a dispute to court. "Those things are easier to go back and straighten out," she said.
She's heard of landlords refusing to offer a reference to tenants in an attempt to keep them from moving. The ACLU's Stanley said that landlords have a First Amendment right to write about their experiences on the Internet, but companies that act as commercial databases - as well as commercial data aggregators - should be subject to the privacy laws that credit companies face.
Landlords also have other options to inform their peers about potentially difficult tenants. They can pay to inform credit reporting agencies of outstanding debts, such as unpaid rent, said Joseph Rooney, deputy commissioner for financial regulation for the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation.
"If landlords would use the credit reporting system to report negatives, there's a legal framework where people can dispute the amount owed," Rooney said.
For example, if you are denied credit based on negative information on your credit report, you can get a free copy to verify the information and challenge potential inaccuracies.
Legal filings, including judgments and liens, should also appear on a person's credit report, Rooney said. (By Liz F. Kay | Baltimore Sun)
Showing posts with label renter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label renter. Show all posts
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Ruling helps poor renters
Counties' order that landlords accept vouchers is upheld
Landlords in Howard and Montgomery counties cannot turn away low-income renters who pay for their housing with federal vouchers, Maryland's highest court ruled yesterday.
The unanimous ruling upholds fair-housing laws in those counties and, housing advocates say, provides momentum for a drive to pass a statewide law requiring landlords to accept rental vouchers. Such a law, advocates say, would make it easier for poor people to live in affluent communities with better jobs and better schools.
"It's appalling that we do not have this as a state law and that people can be denied housing" solely because they are paying with a voucher, said Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett. He said landlords who don't accept vouchers are "impacting quite severely the level of affordable housing that may be available to people."
The Housing Choice voucher program -- formerly called Section 8 -- requires recipients to pay a portion of their income, usually about a third, toward rent and covers the balance with money from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The federal law does not require landlords to accept the vouchers.
But a dozen states, as well as Howard and Montgomery counties in Maryland, have passed laws requiring participation. When a garden apartment complex in Wheaton refused to accept a woman's voucher, Montgomery County's Human Rights Commission fined the owner $15,000 and awarded $5,000 in compensatory damages to the would-be tenant.
The landlord, Glenmont Hills Associates, appealed the decision. A Montgomery Circuit Court judge found for the landlord last year, saying its refusal to participate was based on a legitimate, nondiscriminatory desire "to avoid the administrative hassle of the program."
The Maryland Court of Appeals overturned that decision yesterday. An attorney for the landlord, Jay Holland, said he was "extremely disappointed" and that he and his client are considering petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. At issue is whether federal law, which makes the program voluntary, can be trumped by a state or local law requiring participation.
In its decision, the Court of Appeals quoted from the 1995 HUD regulations creating the program: "State and local governments can of course impose additional requirements."
But Holland said the practical effect of the ruling might be that landlords will set their rents so high that voucher recipients cannot afford them.
Glenmont participates in Montgomery County's rental assistance program and has its own program to provide apartments at discounted rates to low-income residents. But the apartment complex owners felt the additional rules that come with the federal vouchers were burdensome, Holland said.
Affordable-housing advocates say that reasoning is often a red herring.
"Landlords say they don't want the administrative burden, but in many cases they don't want poor people in the buildings, and sometimes it's a surrogate for racial discrimination as well," said Bob Bruskin, senior counsel at the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Montgomery County in the lawsuit.
Others who supported the county said the requirement was critical to integration efforts, both in terms of race and socioeconomics. They said that to qualify for the vouchers, families must pass credit and criminal background checks.
"I don't think America really wants to be so snotty and segregated as to say, 'I don't want somebody who's working but doesn't make as much as I do to live in my neighborhood or have their children go to school with my children,'" said Shanna Smith, president and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance.
Montgomery County has about 5,400 rental vouchers in use, compared with 1,100 in Howard County and more than 11,000 in Baltimore City, which does not have the "source of income" law requiring participation. The law is critical in Montgomery County, officials said, because of the high cost of housing there.
"In this county in particular, where for years you've had a very hot housing market, it's important to make sure that [more] than high-income people have access to housing," said Montgomery County Attorney Leon Rodriguez.
He said the Court of Appeals ruling should put to rest any concerns that other jurisdictions or state lawmakers might have about the legality of local laws pre-empting the federal law. A statewide fair-housing law would make it easier for low-income people to find housing, advocates said.
"If such a law were mandated statewide, that there couldn't be 'source of income' discrimination, it would have a significant impact upon the ability of people with vouchers to find housing and would reduce the specter of homelessness" for the poor, said Gregory Countess, an attorney with the Legal Aid Bureau of Maryland, which focuses on housing issues.
Baltimore City's housing commissioner, Paul A. Graziano, has said that he supports a statewide fair-housing law. (By Stephen Kiehl | Baltimore Sun)
Landlords in Howard and Montgomery counties cannot turn away low-income renters who pay for their housing with federal vouchers, Maryland's highest court ruled yesterday.
The unanimous ruling upholds fair-housing laws in those counties and, housing advocates say, provides momentum for a drive to pass a statewide law requiring landlords to accept rental vouchers. Such a law, advocates say, would make it easier for poor people to live in affluent communities with better jobs and better schools.
"It's appalling that we do not have this as a state law and that people can be denied housing" solely because they are paying with a voucher, said Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett. He said landlords who don't accept vouchers are "impacting quite severely the level of affordable housing that may be available to people."
The Housing Choice voucher program -- formerly called Section 8 -- requires recipients to pay a portion of their income, usually about a third, toward rent and covers the balance with money from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The federal law does not require landlords to accept the vouchers.
But a dozen states, as well as Howard and Montgomery counties in Maryland, have passed laws requiring participation. When a garden apartment complex in Wheaton refused to accept a woman's voucher, Montgomery County's Human Rights Commission fined the owner $15,000 and awarded $5,000 in compensatory damages to the would-be tenant.
The landlord, Glenmont Hills Associates, appealed the decision. A Montgomery Circuit Court judge found for the landlord last year, saying its refusal to participate was based on a legitimate, nondiscriminatory desire "to avoid the administrative hassle of the program."
The Maryland Court of Appeals overturned that decision yesterday. An attorney for the landlord, Jay Holland, said he was "extremely disappointed" and that he and his client are considering petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. At issue is whether federal law, which makes the program voluntary, can be trumped by a state or local law requiring participation.
In its decision, the Court of Appeals quoted from the 1995 HUD regulations creating the program: "State and local governments can of course impose additional requirements."
But Holland said the practical effect of the ruling might be that landlords will set their rents so high that voucher recipients cannot afford them.
Glenmont participates in Montgomery County's rental assistance program and has its own program to provide apartments at discounted rates to low-income residents. But the apartment complex owners felt the additional rules that come with the federal vouchers were burdensome, Holland said.
Affordable-housing advocates say that reasoning is often a red herring.
"Landlords say they don't want the administrative burden, but in many cases they don't want poor people in the buildings, and sometimes it's a surrogate for racial discrimination as well," said Bob Bruskin, senior counsel at the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Montgomery County in the lawsuit.
Others who supported the county said the requirement was critical to integration efforts, both in terms of race and socioeconomics. They said that to qualify for the vouchers, families must pass credit and criminal background checks.
"I don't think America really wants to be so snotty and segregated as to say, 'I don't want somebody who's working but doesn't make as much as I do to live in my neighborhood or have their children go to school with my children,'" said Shanna Smith, president and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance.
Montgomery County has about 5,400 rental vouchers in use, compared with 1,100 in Howard County and more than 11,000 in Baltimore City, which does not have the "source of income" law requiring participation. The law is critical in Montgomery County, officials said, because of the high cost of housing there.
"In this county in particular, where for years you've had a very hot housing market, it's important to make sure that [more] than high-income people have access to housing," said Montgomery County Attorney Leon Rodriguez.
He said the Court of Appeals ruling should put to rest any concerns that other jurisdictions or state lawmakers might have about the legality of local laws pre-empting the federal law. A statewide fair-housing law would make it easier for low-income people to find housing, advocates said.
"If such a law were mandated statewide, that there couldn't be 'source of income' discrimination, it would have a significant impact upon the ability of people with vouchers to find housing and would reduce the specter of homelessness" for the poor, said Gregory Countess, an attorney with the Legal Aid Bureau of Maryland, which focuses on housing issues.
Baltimore City's housing commissioner, Paul A. Graziano, has said that he supports a statewide fair-housing law. (By Stephen Kiehl | Baltimore Sun)
Thursday, August 23, 2007
756 to share $1 million in housing settlement
Advocates for the disabled announced yesterday that 756 people are in line to share $1 million from the settlement of a Baltimore housing discrimination lawsuit.
A victims' compensation fund was established as part of a landmark 2004 settlement in a lawsuit alleging that thousands of people with disabilities were intentionally or illegally excluded from public housing. Other terms of the settlement, worth more than $100 million, include development of more than 1,000 units of public housing accessible to people with disabilities and a program to help them obtain housing.
The parties in the lawsuit - the Maryland Disability Law Center, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Housing Authority of Baltimore City - jointly filed in U.S. District Court yesterday a recommendation to compensate the 756 people. Both the law center and the justice department had sued the housing authority.
Last summer, officials mailed 40,000 notices to potential housing discrimination victims, urging them to take advantage of the compensation fund. Soup kitchens and shelters also held informational meetings about it. About 2,500 claims were filed, said Lauren Young, the disability law center's legal director.
Assuming the court approves the arrangement, each of the identified victims will receive about $1,300 sometime in the next few months, Young said.
"These payments are given to individuals in recognition that their civil rights were violated based on their disabilities," she said in a statement.
Among those recommended for compensation are people who were denied housing because they used wheelchairs, and a person who had requested grab bars and fell repeatedly in the shower.
University of Baltimore's law school is planning to offer financial counseling sessions for recipients of the money. (baltimoresun.com)
A victims' compensation fund was established as part of a landmark 2004 settlement in a lawsuit alleging that thousands of people with disabilities were intentionally or illegally excluded from public housing. Other terms of the settlement, worth more than $100 million, include development of more than 1,000 units of public housing accessible to people with disabilities and a program to help them obtain housing.
The parties in the lawsuit - the Maryland Disability Law Center, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Housing Authority of Baltimore City - jointly filed in U.S. District Court yesterday a recommendation to compensate the 756 people. Both the law center and the justice department had sued the housing authority.
Last summer, officials mailed 40,000 notices to potential housing discrimination victims, urging them to take advantage of the compensation fund. Soup kitchens and shelters also held informational meetings about it. About 2,500 claims were filed, said Lauren Young, the disability law center's legal director.
Assuming the court approves the arrangement, each of the identified victims will receive about $1,300 sometime in the next few months, Young said.
"These payments are given to individuals in recognition that their civil rights were violated based on their disabilities," she said in a statement.
Among those recommended for compensation are people who were denied housing because they used wheelchairs, and a person who had requested grab bars and fell repeatedly in the shower.
University of Baltimore's law school is planning to offer financial counseling sessions for recipients of the money. (baltimoresun.com)
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Washington, DC: Mayor Hopes for $117 Million Yearly
Mayor Adrian M. Fenty said on Monday that he wants to allocate $117 million in new revenue every year as part of a plan to protect and create affordable housing in the District.
According to an outline of the initiative, which Fenty (D) presented to more than 500 Washington Interfaith Network members, 30 percent of new housing units built on city-owned land must be affordable for low-income residents.
The plan calls for a partnership between the city and the interfaith network to produce 5,000 homes as part of a network project that creates low-income housing. The houses would be built in transitional neighborhoods such as Columbia Heights, Brightwood, Deanwood, Bellevue and Washington Highlands, said Sean Madigan, communications director for the office of the deputy mayor for planning and economic development.
"This is very aggressive, but a lot of people say the city is really facing an affordable housing crisis, so steps like this are necessary," Madigan said.
The Rev. Christine Wiley of Covenant Baptist Church in Southwest, which was the host of the event, praised Fenty's proposal. "I usually come up here shaking my finger at somebody," she said.
The District lost 312 affordable units between 2001 and 2005, according to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Fenty's announcement comes a year after he pledged at a meeting with interfaith network leaders that he would implement the group's Vote Neighborhoods First agenda, which asked for $1 billion to be committed to neighborhood revitalization.
Many D.C. residents have seen available housing transformed into high-priced condominiums. Patricia Moten, an interfaith network member who is minister at First Rock Baptist Church, said the steady gentrification is pushing low-income residents out of their homes and into relatives' crowded residences.
Brenda Jordan, president of the Pleasant Park Tenant Association, said the tenants in her building plan to buy it in October. Their company representatives told them last year that they had received an offer to turn the property into condominiums.
"The majority of the people here, we're born and raised here, and we want to stay here," she said. "I know I do." (WashingtonPost.com)
According to an outline of the initiative, which Fenty (D) presented to more than 500 Washington Interfaith Network members, 30 percent of new housing units built on city-owned land must be affordable for low-income residents.
The plan calls for a partnership between the city and the interfaith network to produce 5,000 homes as part of a network project that creates low-income housing. The houses would be built in transitional neighborhoods such as Columbia Heights, Brightwood, Deanwood, Bellevue and Washington Highlands, said Sean Madigan, communications director for the office of the deputy mayor for planning and economic development.
"This is very aggressive, but a lot of people say the city is really facing an affordable housing crisis, so steps like this are necessary," Madigan said.
The Rev. Christine Wiley of Covenant Baptist Church in Southwest, which was the host of the event, praised Fenty's proposal. "I usually come up here shaking my finger at somebody," she said.
The District lost 312 affordable units between 2001 and 2005, according to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Fenty's announcement comes a year after he pledged at a meeting with interfaith network leaders that he would implement the group's Vote Neighborhoods First agenda, which asked for $1 billion to be committed to neighborhood revitalization.
Many D.C. residents have seen available housing transformed into high-priced condominiums. Patricia Moten, an interfaith network member who is minister at First Rock Baptist Church, said the steady gentrification is pushing low-income residents out of their homes and into relatives' crowded residences.
Brenda Jordan, president of the Pleasant Park Tenant Association, said the tenants in her building plan to buy it in October. Their company representatives told them last year that they had received an offer to turn the property into condominiums.
"The majority of the people here, we're born and raised here, and we want to stay here," she said. "I know I do." (WashingtonPost.com)
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
A place to live
The bill passed on 06/11/07 by Baltimore's City Council that will require developers to include a percentage of affordable housing units in new developments is a welcome strategy to provide more opportunities for low-income residents to remain in the city. Similar policies have been successfully implemented in Montgomery and other counties.
This major step forward should work in Baltimore - so long as it dovetails with the city's efforts to convert vacant houses into viable places to live.
Like many surrounding areas, Baltimore's housing prices have climbed significantly in recent years. But what constitutes welcome rising property values for some means unaffordable housing for others, and soaring prices have pushed out many low-income residents. City officials, housing advocates, developers and others have tried for about two years to come up with a workable response.
This bill represents a reasonable compromise. By the beginning of 2009, it will require developers who receive tax breaks or discounted land from the city to set aside 20 percent of their units for low- to moderate-income residents. After another 18 months, development projects that benefit from city rezonings would be required to make 10 percent of units affordable. And if overall housing hits high-end prices, 10 percent of all development projects would have to be made affordable.
Providing more affordable housing is critical as Baltimore remains one of the 10 most impoverished areas of the country, while also experiencing tremendous increases in expensive residences, especially in downtown areas around the waterfront. New mixed-income projects contemplated by the bill would be spread throughout the city, a necessary element to help prevent further concentrations of poverty and affluence that make for a divided city.
The legislation should provide additional affordable housing without discouraging developers from undertaking mixed-income projects. But as with many things, the proof will be in the details.
It's unclear whether $2 million designated for the first year of a trust fund that will allow the city to compensate developers for expenses they incur as a result of the required set-asides will be sufficient - or whether it can be expanded and sustained.
The city will also have to ensure coordination of this new program with its ambitious efforts to reclaim and revitalize thousands of vacant houses. It would not make sense to undermine well-intentioned mixed-income development projects with too-slow efforts to deal with vacant and boarded-up houses in the same vicinity. (baltimoresun.com)
This major step forward should work in Baltimore - so long as it dovetails with the city's efforts to convert vacant houses into viable places to live.
Like many surrounding areas, Baltimore's housing prices have climbed significantly in recent years. But what constitutes welcome rising property values for some means unaffordable housing for others, and soaring prices have pushed out many low-income residents. City officials, housing advocates, developers and others have tried for about two years to come up with a workable response.
This bill represents a reasonable compromise. By the beginning of 2009, it will require developers who receive tax breaks or discounted land from the city to set aside 20 percent of their units for low- to moderate-income residents. After another 18 months, development projects that benefit from city rezonings would be required to make 10 percent of units affordable. And if overall housing hits high-end prices, 10 percent of all development projects would have to be made affordable.
Providing more affordable housing is critical as Baltimore remains one of the 10 most impoverished areas of the country, while also experiencing tremendous increases in expensive residences, especially in downtown areas around the waterfront. New mixed-income projects contemplated by the bill would be spread throughout the city, a necessary element to help prevent further concentrations of poverty and affluence that make for a divided city.
The legislation should provide additional affordable housing without discouraging developers from undertaking mixed-income projects. But as with many things, the proof will be in the details.
It's unclear whether $2 million designated for the first year of a trust fund that will allow the city to compensate developers for expenses they incur as a result of the required set-asides will be sufficient - or whether it can be expanded and sustained.
The city will also have to ensure coordination of this new program with its ambitious efforts to reclaim and revitalize thousands of vacant houses. It would not make sense to undermine well-intentioned mixed-income development projects with too-slow efforts to deal with vacant and boarded-up houses in the same vicinity. (baltimoresun.com)
Friday, May 25, 2007
Baltimore City: Fire highlights lack of shelter for poor
The rowhouse fire in East Baltimore that claimed the lives of six people and left seven injured highlighted a hidden problem of Baltimore housing: poor families who are unable to find or afford decent shelter banding together under one roof.
Advocates said yesterday that the problem is the result of an acute shortage of adequate housing for the city's neediest residents.
They pointed out that the Housing Authority of Baltimore City's inventory has declined by more than 5,000 units in the past 15 years, and that as many as 3,000 other federally subsidized units have been lost during that time. They also said that the loss of permanent subsidized units is not being made up by increases in housing vouchers that allow low-income families to rent in the private market.
"The question I've always tossed out is, 'What happens to all these folks? Where are they?'" said Gregory Countess, assistant director of advocacy for housing and community economic development for the Legal Aid Bureau of Maryland. "The fact that you've got thousands of units of housing lost means that you've lost opportunities for people to live in places that are safe and decent and affordable."
Barbara Samuels, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who specializes in housing issues, said about 29,000 Baltimore families are on the waiting list for public housing - a number that is double the number of units available in the city's portfolio of properties.
"Certainly, it symbolizes the desperate need and demand for affordable housing and the diminishing supply of opportunities," she said of the number of people who were living in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse near Green Mount Cemetery. "You see that in the families that have doubled up, tripled up, in this case maybe even quadrupled up."
The loss of low-income units is not restricted to Baltimore. In recent years, Baltimore County has demolished or plans to demolish about 1,500 units in projects such as Kingsley Park, Samuels said. Because the housing market is regional, the loss of those units can also affect the demand for low-income housing in the city, she says.
"Was some of that housing bad?" she said. "Sure. But nothing is being done to replace it."
Nationally, the National Low Income Housing Coalition wants to create 1.5 million new rental units for needy families, a goal that carries a price tag of about $5 billion, said Nicole Letourneau, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group.
A first step toward reaching that goal was taken Tuesday, when the House of Representatives included $600 million over five years for a national housing trust fund as part of reform legislation for federally chartered private lenders, Letourneau said.
"From the standpoint of the NLIHC, doubling up and tripling up in housing is one of the effects of having a lack of housing that's affordable to people with the lowest incomes," she said.
In Baltimore, the practice - which appears to have been the case in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse - is nothing new.
"It's always been a problem," said Stanley Sugarman, a longtime property owner and manager who recently got out of the business. "I used to go around and see the tenants and you'd see people in the basement or my plumber would tell me there are people sleeping next to the hot water heater. They'd say, 'The people are just visiting.'"
The problem is partly a lack of money in a city where the poverty rate for individuals is nearly 23 percent and for families is nearly 19 percent, figures that are nearly double the national average, according the Census Bureau's most recent American Community Survey.
"A lot of people don't have the ability to pay for decent housing," Sugarman said. "They have to double up. They rent rooms."
The phenomenon is also reflective of broader problems in the city's low-income rental market.
In a 2005 study funded by the Abell Foundation and published by the Urban Institute entitled "Low-End Rental Housing: The Forgotten Story in Baltimore's Housing Boom," Sandra Newman found that the low-income rental market was in "poor shape."
Newman, the director of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies, found that as of 2000, half of the rental units in the city were costing less than $400 a month.
"But because so many renters are poor, even these low rents are unaffordable to many," Newman wrote. "There are about two poor renters for every affordable housing unit in the city."
Advocates say the situation may be getting worse, as the gentrification of some city neighborhoods and the redevelopment of others have led to the loss of private low-end rental units.
In addition, the waiting list for the city's housing voucher program has been closed for four years. Exceptions, according to the Housing Authority's Web site, are made for families who fall into several categories, including being victims of natural disasters, being intimidated victims or witnesses to crimes, being displaced by public action or having a member with a disability.
Presumably, at least one of the families in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse would have qualified under these circumstances, because one of the children used a wheelchair.
But Lauren Young, of the Maryland Disability Law Center, said being on the waiting list is no guarantee of immediate housing.
"It's a long waiting list," she said.
The Housing Authority did not respond to a request for comment.
But in a March draft of its plans for the next two years, the authority said that its "fundamental problem" was "inadequate and unpredictable funding."
Over the past several years, the draft said, the agency's federal operating funds have been cut by $26.2 million and its housing voucher monies have been cut by $18.9 million.
"Maximizing the number of households served will be extremely difficult in light of the inflationary nature of the rental market," the report said.
But Samuels, of the ACLU, said the Housing Authority lost funding for 2,000 vouchers that it failed to use during a six-year period from 1997 to 2003, and that it was diverting millions of dollars worth of vouchers from 2006 through 2008 to other uses.
She charged that the authority is using federal regulatory flexibility to "downsize" its low-income housing assets and calculated that the agency is serving 750 fewer families with vouchers and public housing units than it did in 1992.
Samuels said the authority should be serving more families because of additional vouchers it received to compensate for the loss of demolished public housing and federally subsidized rental units.
"The need is always there," she said. (baltimoresun.com)
Advocates said yesterday that the problem is the result of an acute shortage of adequate housing for the city's neediest residents.
They pointed out that the Housing Authority of Baltimore City's inventory has declined by more than 5,000 units in the past 15 years, and that as many as 3,000 other federally subsidized units have been lost during that time. They also said that the loss of permanent subsidized units is not being made up by increases in housing vouchers that allow low-income families to rent in the private market.
"The question I've always tossed out is, 'What happens to all these folks? Where are they?'" said Gregory Countess, assistant director of advocacy for housing and community economic development for the Legal Aid Bureau of Maryland. "The fact that you've got thousands of units of housing lost means that you've lost opportunities for people to live in places that are safe and decent and affordable."
Barbara Samuels, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who specializes in housing issues, said about 29,000 Baltimore families are on the waiting list for public housing - a number that is double the number of units available in the city's portfolio of properties.
"Certainly, it symbolizes the desperate need and demand for affordable housing and the diminishing supply of opportunities," she said of the number of people who were living in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse near Green Mount Cemetery. "You see that in the families that have doubled up, tripled up, in this case maybe even quadrupled up."
The loss of low-income units is not restricted to Baltimore. In recent years, Baltimore County has demolished or plans to demolish about 1,500 units in projects such as Kingsley Park, Samuels said. Because the housing market is regional, the loss of those units can also affect the demand for low-income housing in the city, she says.
"Was some of that housing bad?" she said. "Sure. But nothing is being done to replace it."
Nationally, the National Low Income Housing Coalition wants to create 1.5 million new rental units for needy families, a goal that carries a price tag of about $5 billion, said Nicole Letourneau, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group.
A first step toward reaching that goal was taken Tuesday, when the House of Representatives included $600 million over five years for a national housing trust fund as part of reform legislation for federally chartered private lenders, Letourneau said.
"From the standpoint of the NLIHC, doubling up and tripling up in housing is one of the effects of having a lack of housing that's affordable to people with the lowest incomes," she said.
In Baltimore, the practice - which appears to have been the case in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse - is nothing new.
"It's always been a problem," said Stanley Sugarman, a longtime property owner and manager who recently got out of the business. "I used to go around and see the tenants and you'd see people in the basement or my plumber would tell me there are people sleeping next to the hot water heater. They'd say, 'The people are just visiting.'"
The problem is partly a lack of money in a city where the poverty rate for individuals is nearly 23 percent and for families is nearly 19 percent, figures that are nearly double the national average, according the Census Bureau's most recent American Community Survey.
"A lot of people don't have the ability to pay for decent housing," Sugarman said. "They have to double up. They rent rooms."
The phenomenon is also reflective of broader problems in the city's low-income rental market.
In a 2005 study funded by the Abell Foundation and published by the Urban Institute entitled "Low-End Rental Housing: The Forgotten Story in Baltimore's Housing Boom," Sandra Newman found that the low-income rental market was in "poor shape."
Newman, the director of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy Studies, found that as of 2000, half of the rental units in the city were costing less than $400 a month.
"But because so many renters are poor, even these low rents are unaffordable to many," Newman wrote. "There are about two poor renters for every affordable housing unit in the city."
Advocates say the situation may be getting worse, as the gentrification of some city neighborhoods and the redevelopment of others have led to the loss of private low-end rental units.
In addition, the waiting list for the city's housing voucher program has been closed for four years. Exceptions, according to the Housing Authority's Web site, are made for families who fall into several categories, including being victims of natural disasters, being intimidated victims or witnesses to crimes, being displaced by public action or having a member with a disability.
Presumably, at least one of the families in the Cecil Avenue rowhouse would have qualified under these circumstances, because one of the children used a wheelchair.
But Lauren Young, of the Maryland Disability Law Center, said being on the waiting list is no guarantee of immediate housing.
"It's a long waiting list," she said.
The Housing Authority did not respond to a request for comment.
But in a March draft of its plans for the next two years, the authority said that its "fundamental problem" was "inadequate and unpredictable funding."
Over the past several years, the draft said, the agency's federal operating funds have been cut by $26.2 million and its housing voucher monies have been cut by $18.9 million.
"Maximizing the number of households served will be extremely difficult in light of the inflationary nature of the rental market," the report said.
But Samuels, of the ACLU, said the Housing Authority lost funding for 2,000 vouchers that it failed to use during a six-year period from 1997 to 2003, and that it was diverting millions of dollars worth of vouchers from 2006 through 2008 to other uses.
She charged that the authority is using federal regulatory flexibility to "downsize" its low-income housing assets and calculated that the agency is serving 750 fewer families with vouchers and public housing units than it did in 1992.
Samuels said the authority should be serving more families because of additional vouchers it received to compensate for the loss of demolished public housing and federally subsidized rental units.
"The need is always there," she said. (baltimoresun.com)
Friday, May 18, 2007
A better balance
If you are a tenant down on your luck and unable to pay your rent, Baltimore is not a great place to be. You may or may not receive notice that you are about to be evicted, and the landlord can toss all your belongings onto the street. City Council member Kenneth N. Harris Sr. and Mayor Sheila Dixon have done a service by bringing landlords and tenants together and pushing legislation - introduced in the City Council yesterday - that strikes a better balance.
The changes are welcome and long overdue.
About 50 percent of Baltimore families were renters in 2006, and many use so much of their monthly income to keep a roof over their heads that any crisis or emergency leaves them behind in rent payments. The result: about 7,000 evictions a year, with no formal requirement for notice to the tenant of when the eviction will take place.
Sometimes a tenant leaves things in the dwelling while trying desperately to scrounge up back rent money, and sometimes the tenant intentionally abandons unwanted items. In either case, the landlord may be left to dispose of the items. And while many landlords are responsible enough to take them to a storage facility or to the dump, many others simply junk them on city streets.
For a tenant who is trying to comply, it's a slap in the face and an affront to basic dignity. The 2,900 tons of furniture, clothing and other belongings tossed outside are also major eyesores that blight many neighborhoods. In addition, it costs the city's Department of Public Works more than $800,000 a year for proper pick-up and disposal - money that could be used more productively to achieve Mayor Dixon's goal of a "cleaner, greener" city. Those are among the reasons the mayor's office worked with Mr. Harris to come up with the new bill.
The bill would give tenants more formal notice of when the eviction would take effect and would prohibit landlords from dumping the evicted tenants' possessions on city streets. Tenants would also have three days in which to reclaim their belongings.
Many other major cities provide storage for seven to 60 days; Baltimore would better serve all its residents by following those examples.
In a city where the median income for renters is less than $25,000 and a two-bedroom unit typically rents for more than $1,000 a month, the larger solution is more affordable housing. But offering a little more protection for tenants' belongings while keeping city streets cleaner is at least one step in the right direction.(baltimoresun.com)
The changes are welcome and long overdue.
About 50 percent of Baltimore families were renters in 2006, and many use so much of their monthly income to keep a roof over their heads that any crisis or emergency leaves them behind in rent payments. The result: about 7,000 evictions a year, with no formal requirement for notice to the tenant of when the eviction will take place.
Sometimes a tenant leaves things in the dwelling while trying desperately to scrounge up back rent money, and sometimes the tenant intentionally abandons unwanted items. In either case, the landlord may be left to dispose of the items. And while many landlords are responsible enough to take them to a storage facility or to the dump, many others simply junk them on city streets.
For a tenant who is trying to comply, it's a slap in the face and an affront to basic dignity. The 2,900 tons of furniture, clothing and other belongings tossed outside are also major eyesores that blight many neighborhoods. In addition, it costs the city's Department of Public Works more than $800,000 a year for proper pick-up and disposal - money that could be used more productively to achieve Mayor Dixon's goal of a "cleaner, greener" city. Those are among the reasons the mayor's office worked with Mr. Harris to come up with the new bill.
The bill would give tenants more formal notice of when the eviction would take effect and would prohibit landlords from dumping the evicted tenants' possessions on city streets. Tenants would also have three days in which to reclaim their belongings.
Many other major cities provide storage for seven to 60 days; Baltimore would better serve all its residents by following those examples.
In a city where the median income for renters is less than $25,000 and a two-bedroom unit typically rents for more than $1,000 a month, the larger solution is more affordable housing. But offering a little more protection for tenants' belongings while keeping city streets cleaner is at least one step in the right direction.(baltimoresun.com)
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Baltimore City: Bill aims to end eviction practice
Landlords would store tenants' items, could not dump on street if city passes measure.The practice of dumping evicted tenants' belongings - couches, appliances, tables, clothes - onto Baltimore streets could soon come to an end under a City Council bill being introduced today.
For years, taxpayers have been underwriting the $800,000 annual cost of disposing of the household furnishings of evicted renters that landlords are allowed to pile on city streets. The proposed legislation, sponsored by Councilman Kenneth N. Harris Sr., would prohibit that practice, require landlords to pay for the storage and disposal of such "eviction chattel," and give tenants three days to reclaim it.
"We didn't make everybody happy [with the bill]," said Harris, a council president candidate who represents North Baltimore's 4th District. "We came up with a compromise."
For more than a decade, the council has tried unsuccessfully to pass legislation to control the costly eviction practice. In fiscal year 2006, 7,062 evictions resulted in the dumping of 2,908 tons of belongings onto city streets, according to city statistics.
In 2003, the Abell Foundation found that evictions are more common in Baltimore than in many cities, in part because the population is largely poor and the eviction process unusually swift, The Sun reported at the time.
Renters can be ousted as quickly as 16 business days after they miss a rent payment. The process can take months elsewhere.
In Baltimore, the consequences extend beyond delinquent renters and affect neighborhoods that have to endure the piles of household goods.
"It's a problem all across the city," said Dan Pontious, regional policy director for the Citizens Planning and Housing Association. "It's humiliating for the tenants, and it certainly doesn't help revitalizing neighborhoods."
But the bill's introduction is just the first step, and the traditionally divisive topic is far from being resolved - despite Mayor Sheila Dixon's apparent support for finding a solution as part of her "cleaner, greener" Baltimore initiative.
Advocacy groups for landlords and tenants have been meeting for several weeks in a working group organized by City Solicitor George A. Nilson to hash out their differences over the proposed legislation.
Tenant representatives said they believe Dixon is supportive of the measure. The mayor's spokesman did not return calls for comment.
"I definitely think this is the furthest we've been on this issue," said Joe Coffey, executive director of Baltimore Neighborhoods Inc. "Renters in general aren't as popular with elected officials or in the community. It'd be great if the council got off its butt and did something about eviction chattel."
Although Harris was calling the draft bill a "compromise" on Friday, tenant and landlord representatives did not appear to be in agreement with the measure as it is currently written.
"I don't think it's anything written in stone," said Katherine Howard, general counsel for Regional Management Inc., a Baltimore company that manages 4,000 rental units in the city.
Alfred Singer, a board member of the Property Owners Association of Greater Baltimore Inc., would not comment. "We're still in the middle of negotiations," Singer said.
But tenant groups are generally pleased with the proposal, even though it does not give tenants as many protections as other cities provide. The Rental Housing Coalition has planned a rally outside of City Hall for 4 p.m. today in support of the measure, said Levern Blackmon, tenant advocate for the Public Justice Center.
"It is inhumane to take people's belongings and throw them on the street," Blackmon said. "Landlords are the only people who can dump trash on the street and not get fined."
Blackmon said he is confident that this is the year for the council to approve such legislation. "The reason we've gotten so far is because of the mayor," he said.
Michael Sarbanes, executive director of the Citizens Planning and Housing Association, predicted that the legislation "will make the landlord-tenant system a lot more efficient" while improving overall cleanliness in neighborhoods.
"Residents are working hard every day to keep their streets clean," Sarbanes said. "It doesn't make sense to have landlords putting tons and tons of stuff on neighborhood streets every day."
Howard said her company agrees with the main goals of the legislation: to end the dumping of eviction chattel and to provide advance notice of the exact eviction date.
Generally tenants are not warned about that date, a process that is overseen by a sheriff's deputy carrying out the court-ordered eviction.
The new legislation would require two warnings: the first would come via mail five days before eviction, and the second would come as a posting on the dwelling two days before the sheriff's visit.
Once the eviction date arrives, landlords would be allowed to take any remaining property and store it at another property or at a storage facility within a half-mile. A renter would have three days to reclaim the property before the landlord is free to dispose of it.
An earlier draft of the legislation proposed giving landlords a 50 percent discount for dumping at the landfill, a move supported by landlords. In 2006, it cost the city $40.85 per ton to dump at landfills, according to a public works official. The draft filed with the council, however, removed the discount.
"Everyone will have an opportunity to come before the council to express their likes or dislikes about the bill," Harris said.
Baltimore tenant groups wanted to give evicted renters seven days to reclaim their property but were willing to compromise on three days to move the bill forward. The Citizens Planning and Housing Association pointed to its research of other cities that offer more generous storage policies: Philadelphia requires a 30-day storage period; St. Paul, Minn., gives 60 days; Los Angeles allows 15 days.
"There are lots of good landlords who handle this issue properly," Coffey said. "But there is a number who don't. And that's why this [legislation] is needed."
Howard said there will be a trickle-down impact on renters if landlords are forced to pick up the costs of storage, hauling and disposal of eviction chattel - costs that come on top of the lost rent and the court fees associated with the eviction.
"All of that has a price tag attached to it, which just increases the bottom line for landlords," Howard said. "Any increase to the bottom line to do this is ... going to affect the affordability of the rent for everyone."
(Baltimore Sun)
For years, taxpayers have been underwriting the $800,000 annual cost of disposing of the household furnishings of evicted renters that landlords are allowed to pile on city streets. The proposed legislation, sponsored by Councilman Kenneth N. Harris Sr., would prohibit that practice, require landlords to pay for the storage and disposal of such "eviction chattel," and give tenants three days to reclaim it.
"We didn't make everybody happy [with the bill]," said Harris, a council president candidate who represents North Baltimore's 4th District. "We came up with a compromise."
For more than a decade, the council has tried unsuccessfully to pass legislation to control the costly eviction practice. In fiscal year 2006, 7,062 evictions resulted in the dumping of 2,908 tons of belongings onto city streets, according to city statistics.
In 2003, the Abell Foundation found that evictions are more common in Baltimore than in many cities, in part because the population is largely poor and the eviction process unusually swift, The Sun reported at the time.
Renters can be ousted as quickly as 16 business days after they miss a rent payment. The process can take months elsewhere.
In Baltimore, the consequences extend beyond delinquent renters and affect neighborhoods that have to endure the piles of household goods.
"It's a problem all across the city," said Dan Pontious, regional policy director for the Citizens Planning and Housing Association. "It's humiliating for the tenants, and it certainly doesn't help revitalizing neighborhoods."
But the bill's introduction is just the first step, and the traditionally divisive topic is far from being resolved - despite Mayor Sheila Dixon's apparent support for finding a solution as part of her "cleaner, greener" Baltimore initiative.
Advocacy groups for landlords and tenants have been meeting for several weeks in a working group organized by City Solicitor George A. Nilson to hash out their differences over the proposed legislation.
Tenant representatives said they believe Dixon is supportive of the measure. The mayor's spokesman did not return calls for comment.
"I definitely think this is the furthest we've been on this issue," said Joe Coffey, executive director of Baltimore Neighborhoods Inc. "Renters in general aren't as popular with elected officials or in the community. It'd be great if the council got off its butt and did something about eviction chattel."
Although Harris was calling the draft bill a "compromise" on Friday, tenant and landlord representatives did not appear to be in agreement with the measure as it is currently written.
"I don't think it's anything written in stone," said Katherine Howard, general counsel for Regional Management Inc., a Baltimore company that manages 4,000 rental units in the city.
Alfred Singer, a board member of the Property Owners Association of Greater Baltimore Inc., would not comment. "We're still in the middle of negotiations," Singer said.
But tenant groups are generally pleased with the proposal, even though it does not give tenants as many protections as other cities provide. The Rental Housing Coalition has planned a rally outside of City Hall for 4 p.m. today in support of the measure, said Levern Blackmon, tenant advocate for the Public Justice Center.
"It is inhumane to take people's belongings and throw them on the street," Blackmon said. "Landlords are the only people who can dump trash on the street and not get fined."
Blackmon said he is confident that this is the year for the council to approve such legislation. "The reason we've gotten so far is because of the mayor," he said.
Michael Sarbanes, executive director of the Citizens Planning and Housing Association, predicted that the legislation "will make the landlord-tenant system a lot more efficient" while improving overall cleanliness in neighborhoods.
"Residents are working hard every day to keep their streets clean," Sarbanes said. "It doesn't make sense to have landlords putting tons and tons of stuff on neighborhood streets every day."
Howard said her company agrees with the main goals of the legislation: to end the dumping of eviction chattel and to provide advance notice of the exact eviction date.
Generally tenants are not warned about that date, a process that is overseen by a sheriff's deputy carrying out the court-ordered eviction.
The new legislation would require two warnings: the first would come via mail five days before eviction, and the second would come as a posting on the dwelling two days before the sheriff's visit.
Once the eviction date arrives, landlords would be allowed to take any remaining property and store it at another property or at a storage facility within a half-mile. A renter would have three days to reclaim the property before the landlord is free to dispose of it.
An earlier draft of the legislation proposed giving landlords a 50 percent discount for dumping at the landfill, a move supported by landlords. In 2006, it cost the city $40.85 per ton to dump at landfills, according to a public works official. The draft filed with the council, however, removed the discount.
"Everyone will have an opportunity to come before the council to express their likes or dislikes about the bill," Harris said.
Baltimore tenant groups wanted to give evicted renters seven days to reclaim their property but were willing to compromise on three days to move the bill forward. The Citizens Planning and Housing Association pointed to its research of other cities that offer more generous storage policies: Philadelphia requires a 30-day storage period; St. Paul, Minn., gives 60 days; Los Angeles allows 15 days.
"There are lots of good landlords who handle this issue properly," Coffey said. "But there is a number who don't. And that's why this [legislation] is needed."
Howard said there will be a trickle-down impact on renters if landlords are forced to pick up the costs of storage, hauling and disposal of eviction chattel - costs that come on top of the lost rent and the court fees associated with the eviction.
"All of that has a price tag attached to it, which just increases the bottom line for landlords," Howard said. "Any increase to the bottom line to do this is ... going to affect the affordability of the rent for everyone."
(Baltimore Sun)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
