Not yet.
“After much discussion, it was the consensus of the (Lakewood City) Council to implement a $60 business license fee for multi-family apartments per location; and the Council agreed to consider business licensing for single family rental housing at a later date.”
Perhaps after the dust settles.
This decision, reflected in the minutes of the Council’s study session November 14, 2016 (p.16 of 178), has of-late been of concern as expressed both in an article and comments postedNovember 11 and November 15 in this publication, as well as objections by some of the council.
Per the Council minutes of October 24, “some councilmembers did not like this approach,”(p.105 of 226) referring to the recommendation of Community Economic Development (CED) to charge the same rental business license fee of $60/location to owners of single family rentals, as those levied on properties with multiple rentals.
In reply to Council, CED offered McDonald’s restaurants as an example, four of which are located in Lakewood. “Each restaurant is required to obtain four separate business licenses. If the Council were to establish a rule that only one license is required for single family rentals, no matter the number, it would be carving out a special exception to the City’s standard business license practices.”
Besides, one of the objectives, said David Bugher, Assistant City Manager, Development Services, “is to keep the system as simple as possible, particularly as it relates to the development of an online registration system. This exception, if accepted by the Council, increases the complexity of software development which is currently underway. Assigning a license with a uniform amount to a specific property location is the most straightforward system.”
With Bugher’s plan, 4,707 rental properties multiplied by the $60 general business license yields $282,420, and would “more than double the number of licenses processed by the CED annually from about 3,500 to over 8,000.”
This does not include CED’s proposed per unit fee ($9 recommended in late October increased to $12 currently) generating nearly another $200,000.
Since this whole “rental housing program” – and associated fees – is being billed as having “intrinsic value to a surrounding neighborhood, improving quality of life and property values,” why aren’t mobile home parks addressed?
With this literal foot-in-the-door by the city, no doubt they will be.
Beware of incrementalism! It makes perfect sense to hit the apartment owners up first for a license fee. There are far fewer of them and they are viewed with less sympathy compared to owners of single family rentals. Thus, with less political clout, apartment owners are an easy target. The city will let the dust settle, despite the protests by apartment owners, and then once the city has swallowed that pill extend the license requirement to all rentals, perhaps again incrementally. They may make the case that duplexes and four plexes (normally still considered singe family for the sake of financing) or owners of more than “X” single family rentals need to be licensed. Eventually all rentals will have to be licensed. This is a classic case of the government coming for your neighbor down the street and you do nothing; then the neighbor across the street and you do nothing. Then the government comes for you and there’s nobody left to do anything for you. If the license fee is unfair for rental properties then it is unfair for any rental property: apartments, multifamily and single family. We must fight for our neighbors today or stand alone tomorrow.
This is an excellent quote!!!
“We must fight for our neighbors today or stand alone tomorrow.”
#RentersHaveRightsToo
facebook.com/RentersHaveRights2
It’s the cost of doing business! Get over it. It’s a small fee for the loads these landlords make.
Doing a great job City Counsel for looking at this so closely. Stick to the standards and don’t make exceptions to the rule.
I love it when comments like, ” Its a small fee for the loads these landlords make”. First off you have no idea what the payment versus rent is on each house. Second off the whole idea behind a tax or fee when imposed by a government entity is that something of value is then received by the populous. In the case of a very specific fee that targets a certain demographic or slice of the population like this, the idea,is the fee would be paid by those receiving the item or service of value. (This like people who use a,roll bridge everyday pay for more of the cost of a bridge) what will these property owners receive? What additional service? Im sorry but it is way more than the cost of doing business.
“In reply to Council, CED offered McDonald’s restaurants as an example, four of which are located in Lakewood. “Each restaurant is required to obtain four separate business licenses. ”
Hmmm….Since McDonald’s are often franchises owned by different individuals then it makes sense that those different individuals each have their own business licenses…..but if it’s the same individual licensee then that seems like a redundancy to require a separate business license per location….just another method to perpetuate a bloated bureaucracy, IMHO.