I have lived in Lakewood for close to a half a century. During many of those years, I owned at least 7 rental homes in Lakewood. This was all before Lakewood decided to punish good landlords. Lakewood’s punishment in the form of the Residential Rental Inspection Program is set to begin in the year 2018.
Look at the math. Seven rental properties times say a $100 annual rental inspection fee is $700 the first year. Assuming the city never ever raises the annual fee, the property owner or tenant will have to pay $7,000 in the first decade. Fifty years of rental property ownership equals $35,000 of cash down the toilet; for what?
Is there any Lakewood citizen who would be happy when confronted in their bank parking lot by an armed robber who sticks a gun in their face and takes their bank bag containing $35,000 cash?
Would anyone be happy if their company bookkeeper embezzled $35,000 over a period of years from their company coffers?
A gun or a pencil matters not. The $35,000 is gone. That is a big chunk torn from a hard working business person’s retirement fund or from a low-income renter’s meager annual income. For what?
Pencil or gun? Actually, I would prefer the gun. In the gun scenario, I have a chance to do a gun-grab and beat the robber senseless with his own gun until he gives up the fight and begs me to call the police. In the end, the robber goes to the hospital, then jail and I still have my $35,000. That is much better than embezzlement or the City of Lakewood’s cash grab.
The City of Lakewood does not use a gun. They use the embezzler’s tool of choice, the pencil. Lakewood is not robbing or embezzling. They are legislating an unnecessary rental inspection program that will chisel innocent property owners and innocent renters by implementing a draconian city ordinance that punishes everyone in the City’s effort to solve a problem that is applicable to a minority of property owners who are bona fide slumlords.
Lakewood’s plan is an ugly money grab that will punish property owners and renters for no reason. Yes, there are slum lords in our city, but why should innocent people have to pay $35,000 for the sins of a few?
If I currently owned rental property in Lakewood, I would transition all my tenants out of my properties and sell my rentals. Our City of Lakewood is creating a hostile business environment with their invasive time wasting and money wasting rental inspection program.
If other property owners do the same, fewer rentals and higher rents will be the unintended consequence of their stated effort to help lower-income citizens. The Rental Inspection Program stands to harm the very people City Council professes to help.
Maybe Lakewood’s true goal is to reduce the number of rentals in our city so they can run lower-income citizens out and increase the tax base. If that be the case, our city will have missed their stated goal of helping lower income renters.
I have an idea. Why don’t Lakewood citizens ask the six councilpersons, who voted for the rental inspection program, to write a personal check from their retirement accounts for $35,000 each?
Seems reasonable to me. A seven-property landlord loses $35,000 to the city. Each council person, who voted for the rental inspection program, loses $35,000 to the city.
The six council persons who voted for the Residential Rental Inspection Program are as follows:
- Mayor Don Anderson.
- Deputy Mayor Jason Whalen.
- Council Person Mary Moss.
- Council Person Michael Brandstetter.
- Council Person Paul Bocchi.
- Council Person John Simpson.
To be fair I will endeavor to inform you as soon as I am made aware that any of the six listed council persons write their $35,000 checks to the City of Lakewood. Lakewood can use the $210,000 to help renters in need.
The City of Lakewood has announced plans for two informational meetings where they will explain what they are going to do to the citizens of Lakewood. Click on the link that follows for meeting details. RESIDENTIAL RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM.
Usually legitimate operators like licensing requirements as it screens out bad actors and levels the playing field. You have been tilting at this issue for a long time … seems like you alone. I recall a photo of an empty hearing room. $100 isn’t an enormous burden until you multiply it by 10 years and 7 units. More like $8.50 a month.
As a regular reader I generally appreciate your efforts. This one I must say is a bit long in the tooth. For me it would be ok if you gave it a rest.
Mr. Hammond,
While your name sounds familiar to me, I do not believe we know each other. I must say, you are a master of diplomacy. I hear your message and understand point of view, clearly and I also note you communicated what you had to say in a most kind and constructive manner.
I too am tired of the RIP subject, but feel compelled to continue writing until the unfairness stops.
If Lakewood had 30,000 rentals and a large number of them were slum properties, I would welcome RIP and I would be happy to pay my $8.50 per month. That is not the case, so what we have is the city using a sledge hammer to smash a peanut instead of using an appropriate tool, a nut cracker. The city has gone overboard.
The city could use outreach, tenant education, a Rental Hotline and the 5 resources such as the Landlord Tenant law to help the small minority of renters living in slum conditions. Instead they took the most expensive route which impacts on the largest number of innocent citizens.
If I had become a writer during the 1940s, I would have continued to write about the unfairness of Japanese Internment and Jewish concentration camps until the last man, woman and child were released back to freedom.
I recognize that the topic of RIP is not on the same level as the others, but the principle is the same. Stop the unfairness.
While there is repetition in the theme any time I write about RIP, I try not to repeat myself in terms of the core topic of the article. In the meantime, the city continues to churn out an unending supply of topics related to RIP.
I promise you this. I will stop when they stop. Most importantly, I will endeavor to write on other more topics I hope will be more pleasing to you.
Thanks for reaching out.
Joseph Boyle
Dear Joe, I do appreciate all of your writing and your opinions on this topic. My husband and I own three properties, we’ve been biting our lips waiting to find out what the decisions are going to be from the Lakewood city Council. Now that we know, we will be selling off all three properties. And I’m sure we’re not the only ones. Don’t get discouraged by somebody trying to minimize this program. There are a lot of us out here who read your letters, and stand in complete agreement with you. I just don’t come forth and write very often. I hate this as much as you do, it will serve no purpose other than to fill their pockets. So now my three good and loyal tenants are going to be forced to find somewhere else to live. Thank you Lakewood
The Rental Housing Safety Program will cost landlords $1 a month per unit.
For a single family home that is $1 a month x 12 months, which is $12 a year.
For a 10-unit apartment complex that is $10 a month x 12 months, which is $120 a year.
— Brynn Grimley, communications manager, City of Lakewood
They get you in failed inspection fines! The inspection guidelines are strict and could cost landlords a lot of money in fines, repairs and renovations with lost rent.
Joe,
Thank you for your thoughtful article on RIP. Although I am not a landlord or a resident of Lakewood, I understand the passions on both sides of the issue. I am just not involved enough to be very interested. What I am interested in, and took away from your article, is how to do a gun grab and beat some dude’s head in with his own pistol. If you would be so kind as to explain that to me when we have lunch tomorrow, I would appreciate it.
Your friend Larry
It’s starting! Yay! Nothing you can do about it!
Get over it you slumlords!
We are a renters in the Lakewood area. A family with four children. We are being evicted because of the this! Our landlord gave us a 30 day vacate! We have nowhere to go, nor is this sufficient time to save to move either. Lost, broken and on the verge of homelessness