Rental Property Advisory Committee Report Due

[Marc LeVine]

Good news! The Rental Property Advisory Committee wrapped up its meeting, tonight, and are asking to be put on a December workshop agenda. On one of the key recommendations, most of the committee members went head to head with a local illegal immigrant advocate and pretty much overruled him.

Stay tuned for announcement of the date and time when the committee's presentation will be given, in public.

Marc

[Wyane]

"went head to head with a local illegal immigrant advocate and pretty much overruled him"

color=Purple]Meaning???, please explain overruled?[[/color]

[admin]

Since we are expecting to finally find out what has been proposed, it is time for us to really ignite that discussion here. I hope to have all of our participants respond to this thread and state what their expectations are. It is better to put this up here now, as opposed to playing Monday morning quarterback later.

So, What do you expect, dear readers?

I will be back with my own points.

[wyane]

NO-Sub-rentals! A tenant can NOT lease his property, and allow a tenant to then have a "Friends" chip in, this is a Sub-rental agreement, outside of what the landlord has documented.

If your reside in rental property for more than 30 days, your name must be on a lease!

This is not a collage town, and the flippant transient "Frat House" style occupancy should not be tolerated.

Other towns have restriction as to how many Non related persons can be on a lease, et,al occupy a property.

All residents MUST be listed on a lease, by name, and that a "Legal lease" document is required, not a "Hand Shake", and that the town gets a copy (as other towns do require)!

[wyane]

OK I am the TYPO KING !!!!

***NO-Sub-rentals! A LANDLORD[/b] can NOT lease his property, and allow a tenant to then have a "Friends" chip in, this is a Sub-rental agreement, outside of what the landlord has documented.

[wyane]

OK I am NOW the EMPEROR of the Typos!!!!


***NO-Sub-rentals! A LANDLORD can NOT ALLOW, and will be fined is a legitimate tenant on his property, takes in a "Boarder" / "Friends" who "chip's" in on the rent money, this is a Sub-rental Agreement (actually this condition would be considered a rooming house), outside of whom ever the landlord has documented. This is one of the problems causing the over crowded homes.

Maybe this exists today, but is tough to investigate??

[admin]

admin said:

Since we are expecting to finally find out what has been proposed, it is time for us to really ignite that discussion here. I hope to have all of our participants respond to this thread and state what their expectations are. It is better to put this up here now, as opposed to playing Monday morning quarterback later.

So, What do you expect, dear readers?

I will be back with my own points.

As promised, I am posting my own thoughts on this subject. This issue is one of the most crucial things this town has going on right now. If this does not prove to be a winner, we will really be up the creek. I know the committee has been working on this for months. I have believed that the length of time has been a good thing so that it is done right.

Any rental oversight has to take three factors into consideration. The landlords rights, the tenant rights, and the things we look at, quality of life issues. If all three of these things are not taken into consideration, we will have problems, failures, and possibly law suits.

Many of the tenant rights are covered by the state. This should be a no brainer. Tenants have every reason to believe that their rental homes will be kept up in a reasonable way by the landlords.

The issues that most of us are concerned about are the quality of life issues. We all have the right and reasonable expectation that we can live in peace and safety. The key to this will be enforcement. This is where the landlords will also have the rightful concern that enforcement is done evenly, fairly, and consistently. Considering constitutional issues and the difficulty there can be in finding problems. Fines must reflect the severity of the problems. Fair warning must be given. Follow through must be present.

First solution- Is it possible to deny or revoke a Certificate of occupancy, due to multiple problems from the same landlord? In other words, can we deny them the right to rent if they are not compliant?


Second solution- Increase fines. This was evident with the illegal restaurant. Those fines were way too small. The landlords who allow extreme behavior must feel it in their wallet. To be fair, who ever would have thought that an illegal restaurant would exist. We have to be better prepared when considering the behavior that is developing. Increased fines and reaching out to other agencies will help this.


Third Solution- We know that waste disposal is getting more and more expensive. Take a look at the impact the rentals are having on this and find a legal and fair way to ensure that the landlords pick up more of the financial burden.


Fourth- In the spirit of waste removal, also study how the rentals are affecting the schools. If they are proving to be a big enough burden, get more money out of them for the schools.

Fifth- Oversight of the code enforcement office. They must be made to do their jobs. Many complaints have aired over the perception that not enough is being done. If nothing else, this is for public relations and education.


Sixth- Above all, enforce the existing quality of life issues. Determine what is being ignored the most and go after these issues, again, with fairness, consistency and in a non discriminatory manner.


Seventh- Encourage citizens to get involved in reporting and signing complaints against quality of life violations. This should include easy access to the town ordinances and responsive leadership.

[WYane]

Brian...ALL,

As I understand it, the Boro ONLY has control over the single and two family units...Three Plus....including the Garden apartments are all under state control.

A municipality can ONLY enforce what the State issues as code, and....to start, 3+ the multiple unit dwellings get inspected only once every 5 years...

SO how can code enforcement manage our many garden apartments?

Please tell me I am wrong, and I'd like to hear more about how the Boro or any municipality, can manage enforcement, what happened to "Home Rule"?

[admin]

You are all sleeping. ( other than Wyane) Where are all of the comments on this crucial topic? Are you all waiting until after the fact so that you can play Monday Morning Quarterback? That will serve no purpose.

We need to see commentary now! Make no mistake that this board is being watched by some good eyes.

I will put out another belief that I have. After the RAB puts our it's recommendations, I believe that they should stay on as a permanent board. This is an important topic that will require some strict oversight. A permanent board would open up dialog for residents and ensure that ordinances can be fine tuned.

The more successful the new recommendations are, the more likely that certain hostile elements will start another law suit or two. We will need to continue fighting the slumlords and their deviant tenants long after the recommendations get to council.

In other words, when the recommendations are enacted, that is when the real fight will begin.

[Libyan Sibyl]

I heard on the radio the other day that California uses its unfair business practices law on overcrowding landlords.

I did some research and here is the law www.lsnc.net/housing/fh_manual/fh_manual_chap_01_2004.pdf.

Obviously, research needs to be done on its potential application under NJ lalws, but its something that might be considered or later added to the recommendations at a later date.

I don't know how many weapons are needed in the arsenal, but here is another consideration.