I am providing you with a list of four recognizable Lakewood businesses. Once you review the four business names and photos, I will pose a single question.
Harold A. Allen Realtors
Lakewood Villa Realty
Reeder Management
Northwest Properties Agency, Inc.
My single question: What two things do these four businesses have in common?
Answer (1) All four business entities are well known, long established and highly respected family owned companies that are in the business of managing large numbers of rental properties.
Answer (2) Our Lakewood City Council is considering a proposal called Rental Inspection Program (R.I.P.) that if inaugurated, will target and victimize these companies. The R.I.P. will create an unfriendly business environment for these and other quality Lakewood businesses.
On the surface, the R.I.P. sounds like a good idea. The stated purpose of this new government bureaucracy is to solve the problem of inadequate housing conditions for renters doing business with slumlords. Everyone agrees that there are bad landlords (slumlords) who rent uninhabitable properties thereby taking advantage of the economically impoverished. No argument. I endorse having our city help these tenants, but accomplishing the end goal must be done in an intelligent and equitable manner.
Articles have been published in The News Tribune and The Suburban Times about the potential negative impact of R.I.P. on good private landlords, tenants and foreign exchange students. No articles have been written about another victim class, Lakewood property management companies.
Let’s take a close look at these companies.
Harold A. Allen Realtors was founded by Harold A. Allen, Sr., in 1940. A third generation family member, Mr. Mike Larson, continues to operate his family business in it’s 76th year. Allen Company manages approximately 500 rental units. Mr. Larson and his company have impeccable reputations.
Lakewood Villa Realty was founded in 1960 and is currently operated by a second generation family member, Mrs. Bridget Upton. The company manages about 200 rental units. Ms. Upton and her company both enjoy a decades long positive reputation.
Reeder Management was founded in 1974 by Mr. Paul Reeder and is currently operated by a second generation family member, Mr. Brian Reeder. Reeder Management is responsible for 4,000 rental units. The reputation of this company is beyond reproach.
Northwest Properties Agency, Inc was founded in 1960 and currently involves both second and third generation family members who continue to run this fine business. They manage 210 rental properties and have an unblemished reputation.
These management companies adhere to the Washington State Landlord Tenant Law. Thus Lakewood tenants already have all the protection they need.
None of these firms manage any properties that would fit the City of Lakewood’s problem property profile. None of these companies will agree to work with a slumlord unless the slumlord agrees to comply with state law. All properties must meet the standard or professional property management companies will refuse to represent the property.
The City of Lakewood takes the position that they have no way of knowing how bad or good rentals are unless they set up the R.I.P. and inspect all the properties. That is what I call a no warrant “fishing expedition”.
My key message is this. These business entities are not a part of the problem. In spite of that, our city is considering victimizing these well run businesses. This amounts to a threat to these business enterprises and the creation of a city induced unfriendly business environment. This unnecessary government intrusion will cost these long term business owners and their property owner clients, time, money and administrative burden without generating a benefit to anyone including the tenants the city wishes to help.
Well, there is one benefit. The R.I.P. can help our local government with empire and revenue building. More government. More expense. No benefit.
The R.I.P. will have no positive impact on properties professionally managed by these Lakewood companies.
Disclosure: My 40+ year background in real estate includes:
- Former personal ownership of residential and commercial rentals.
- Former ownership of a Lakewood property management company.
- Former Real Estate Broker’s license.
- Former real estate developer.
Having retired several years ago, I no longer have a Broker’s license, nor do I own or manage a single rental property. Thus, the R.I.P. will not impact on me directly in any way.
Although I am not a stake holder, I am speaking out because I am obviously qualified to do so and because no one else is standing up to prevent Lakewood businesses from being victimized by the City of Lakewood’s proposed Rental Inspection Program.
If intelligence and common sense prevail, our city council will vote “NO” on this R.I.P. proposal. If our council votes “YES” then that is just another day of politics with unnecessary unintended consequences forcing government interference into the lives of our good business people and innocent tenants.
There are two fallacious principles that may generate council approval.
Principle (1) Problem by a few = punishment for everyone.
Example: Would it make sense to charge bank customers a new $10 fee every time they enter the bank after a bank robbery assuming they did not rob the bank? No. Then it follows that it does not make sense to charge good property owners / managers who are not involved with slum properties a R.I.P. fee when they are not any part of the problem.
Principle (2) Other cities like Bellevue have an R.I.P. so the City of Lakewood should have an R.I.P. too or like our kids say, “Everybody is doing it.” The fallacy of this principle can be quickly detected when we are reminded that prostitution is legal in Nevada. Does that mean we should legalize prostitution in Lakewood? No!
My frank opinion is only meant to be a direct critical attack on the Rental Inspection Program proposal, because it is such an unethical and unfair idea. I am not being critical of our Lakewood City Council. They are all intelligent people and after all are simply considering this proposal. Our city council seeks public opinion. They now have mine. I just hope they are able to make the proper ethical decision.
A public meeting is scheduled on July 5, 2016, at 7:00p at Lakewood City Hall located at 6000 Main Street SW, Lakewood, Washington.
There is a relatively low-cost, common-sense alternative to the $175,000 annually that Lakewood estimates it would need to raise through fees and penalties in order to run RIP.
It’s what State Rep. Chad Magendanz, R-Issaquah, who represents the mostly rural areas of Eastern King County, said Public Health could do instead of charging annual fees for every septic tank: a letter. “Magendanz said that sending a letter to a septic owner who is the subject of a complaint could notify offenders and prompt corrective action.
“If they’re still out of compliance, impose a fine and recover the costs,” Magendanz suggested.
Lakewood’s RIP architects considered that: a letter. Communication and all that. The idea was dismissed however as having ‘little benefit.’
As it turns out, the King County Council dropped its idea for the extremely unpopular “turd tax” as it became known when hundreds showed up at meetings in protest.
The same could, should happen here on July 5.
Letters – speaking of letters – were sent via email June 20 and 28 to landlords, real estate, property management and investment associations – 48 letters in all – with a summary of the issue and an invitation to both forward to others and attend July 5.
I was thinking the correct answer was that if a blue Z4 parks in front of your business, you’re doomed…
I also am against this RIP idea. The state law should be enforced & education used to inform tenants of their rights. I’ll be there July 5th.
Isn’t this really about cleaning up Lakewood? Better yet, we could simply state it’s an indirect means of driving out low-income housing.
The costs will simply be shunted to the renters that are already faced with escalating rents in the Puget Sound area to the point that more will continue to be driven into living on the streets in tents. Do we have existing laws that prevent people from “camping” at various locations within the City that haven’t been addressed yet? Drive through the downtown Seattle area or take notice at all the tent camps in Seattle while going to a Mariners game. Maybe we should look a little more at the downstream consequences of this action and review some alternatives. Maybe we should simply deal with the issues via the Landlord Tenant Acts and those responsible without resorting to creation of another stratification of bureaucracy that ensures that we all pay for the few that continue to operate as slum lords. We do own rental properties in two other cities and we simply added the cost onto the renters in the one City that enacted this program. Lets not be Seattle in this respect by creating a much larger problem in which Seattle now enacts laws protecting and supporting tent communities.
If this is a means to drive out low-income housing within the community, then carry on. Some of those tents are fairly colorful. The Police will love chasing people out of their tents, watch them loading up their shopping carts and having them move again a few days later from a new location. Great use of that resource.
I know that some will state that these kinds of problems would not realistically occur under the RIP. Actually, what would the City do if Letters don’t work? Condemn the property and evict the renters for the slumlords? Take a little more time to think this through. At the end of the day, the community as a whole will not benefit by the end result or there will be no significant improvement in the situation other than costs for the program being shunted onto those not responsible for the situation.
Thanks for helping to inform us. Things that can look good on paper and in concept can be damaging!
I know as a former renter how horrible it was using a couple of these so called ” management companies”. When I would go look at the listings they gave me and how unsafe or uninhabitable some of the listings were was a surprise to me but more surprising was the reaction that I received from both these management companies when I informed them of what I found. It seems they were not surprised and one even stated that other potential renters had made similar comments about the properties.
My question is would the Rental Inspection Program, R.I.P. help so more families don’t have to go through what I went through. It was a total waste of my time which my family and I had little time of with us just arriving here from another state (military) and having to rush to find some form of housing immediately.
I used one of these companies with my property and must say that they did ‘ok’. My issue was that if they didn’t keep my property in good condition for the tenants when I was actively involved in keeping it respectable, then what do they do for properties that don’t have active involvement by the property owners?
A letter is effective, but a personal presence does a lot more to prove the city is committed and serious about improving living conditions. It’s not a matter of ‘pushing people out’.