Post by BrianSullivan on Jan 29, 2010 19:49:37 GMT -5
On Thursday January 21st, I attended a Rental Board meeting. AS mentioned in another thread, I will be paying much closer attention to council and rental meetings. At this meeting, the Freehold Land Lord association did do an hour long presentation. I did not bring a pen and paper to take notes so this post will be fairly general and not specific. APP reporter Kim Predham was there and I am surprised that there has been no article. If readers go back through this site they will see that it was reported by me that the FLLA has been shy of the press to date.
Three members of the FLLA showed up: Jeff Friedman, Andrew Keilly, and Chris LoPresti. They did a very good job and were very open and informative. Jeff started off with a well spoken introduction and then Chris took over most of the discussion from there. If readers recall, I had sent some questions to the group and had not received an answer at that time. Many of those questions were answered and I will post based on those questions.
1. What are the specific issues that the association is concerned with? The web site says the landlord registration fee is one, are there other concerns about what the town should or should not be doing?
Besides the land lord registration fee, they also have concerns surrounding unannounced code enforcement visits and holding land lords accountable for tenant actions.
2. Are all of the landlords in the association residents of Freehold Borough?
The answer is no, but many are. Out of the three who were at the meeting, Andrew and Jeff are borough residents while Chris is living out of town though had lived here.
3. Have any of the organizers of this group or its members been subjected to enforcement measures from the town?
Without question this is probably the most awkward and unreasonable question asked. At least pertaining to the three at the meeting, they own multiple properties and are recognized as good landlords who try to do the right things. There is no reason to believe that these three are problem landlords.
4. While it is understandable that the association may have its own concerns in mind, the town has often acted on behalf of the surrounding home owners. The increase in rentals in town has caused many home owners to have justified concerns about their quality of life. Will the association work with the town, home owners and residents in addressing their quality of life concerns? Any specific ideas to meet that goal? Safety concerns of tenants?
There is no question that the FLLA does have a strong desire to work with the town and does share the quality of life and safety concerns that all residents have. Specific details toward solutions are not available at this time.
5. The town now has a rental review board in place. Has the association approached the rental board with its concerns? How about having a representative on that board?
The FLLA has been in front of the rental board in the past and this meeting was one more step in that direction. One member of the rental board who was silent, is a member of the FLLA.
6. How strong is the desire of the association to engage in or avoid a law suit against the town?
Tough question to answer, but I get the impression that thought the FLLA means business, they do not want to get into a law suit.
7. Would the association, at any point, allow non landlords into meetings to see what is going on and address the issues?
No answer at this time
8. Is there a definable point when the landlord association will be happy with results and not need to continue, or will this be an ongoing project?
No answer here either, but again, my impression is that there will be a need for ongoing dialog and striving to work together on a number of points meeting all people's needs.
9. Does the association have any ties with any outside interests? ones that have sued our town in the past?
No answer to report on at this time. The question did arise as to if the FLLA is using the same lawyer that the LLA has used in the past. If I recall correctly, that answer is no.
Final thoughts:
Again, I kept this fairly general, mostly due to the sensitive nature of this topic. I see a lot of promise but also get the feeling that not everybody will get what they want. I have mentioned in the past for the need for rental issues to be fair and balanced. It should be no surprise that the FLLA has concerns that should be looked at with a reasonable approach. I get the feeling that the FLLA wants to work with the town for every one's good. This was a good opportunity for the rental board to listen to genuine concerns. This night was not the night for solutions, but communication. The FLLA should be encouraged to continue its work with the rental board so that long term solutions are equitable and fair. If I can get some more accurate information on this meeting and can share it, I will.
Three members of the FLLA showed up: Jeff Friedman, Andrew Keilly, and Chris LoPresti. They did a very good job and were very open and informative. Jeff started off with a well spoken introduction and then Chris took over most of the discussion from there. If readers recall, I had sent some questions to the group and had not received an answer at that time. Many of those questions were answered and I will post based on those questions.
1. What are the specific issues that the association is concerned with? The web site says the landlord registration fee is one, are there other concerns about what the town should or should not be doing?
Besides the land lord registration fee, they also have concerns surrounding unannounced code enforcement visits and holding land lords accountable for tenant actions.
2. Are all of the landlords in the association residents of Freehold Borough?
The answer is no, but many are. Out of the three who were at the meeting, Andrew and Jeff are borough residents while Chris is living out of town though had lived here.
3. Have any of the organizers of this group or its members been subjected to enforcement measures from the town?
Without question this is probably the most awkward and unreasonable question asked. At least pertaining to the three at the meeting, they own multiple properties and are recognized as good landlords who try to do the right things. There is no reason to believe that these three are problem landlords.
4. While it is understandable that the association may have its own concerns in mind, the town has often acted on behalf of the surrounding home owners. The increase in rentals in town has caused many home owners to have justified concerns about their quality of life. Will the association work with the town, home owners and residents in addressing their quality of life concerns? Any specific ideas to meet that goal? Safety concerns of tenants?
There is no question that the FLLA does have a strong desire to work with the town and does share the quality of life and safety concerns that all residents have. Specific details toward solutions are not available at this time.
5. The town now has a rental review board in place. Has the association approached the rental board with its concerns? How about having a representative on that board?
The FLLA has been in front of the rental board in the past and this meeting was one more step in that direction. One member of the rental board who was silent, is a member of the FLLA.
6. How strong is the desire of the association to engage in or avoid a law suit against the town?
Tough question to answer, but I get the impression that thought the FLLA means business, they do not want to get into a law suit.
7. Would the association, at any point, allow non landlords into meetings to see what is going on and address the issues?
No answer at this time
8. Is there a definable point when the landlord association will be happy with results and not need to continue, or will this be an ongoing project?
No answer here either, but again, my impression is that there will be a need for ongoing dialog and striving to work together on a number of points meeting all people's needs.
9. Does the association have any ties with any outside interests? ones that have sued our town in the past?
No answer to report on at this time. The question did arise as to if the FLLA is using the same lawyer that the LLA has used in the past. If I recall correctly, that answer is no.
Final thoughts:
Again, I kept this fairly general, mostly due to the sensitive nature of this topic. I see a lot of promise but also get the feeling that not everybody will get what they want. I have mentioned in the past for the need for rental issues to be fair and balanced. It should be no surprise that the FLLA has concerns that should be looked at with a reasonable approach. I get the feeling that the FLLA wants to work with the town for every one's good. This was a good opportunity for the rental board to listen to genuine concerns. This night was not the night for solutions, but communication. The FLLA should be encouraged to continue its work with the rental board so that long term solutions are equitable and fair. If I can get some more accurate information on this meeting and can share it, I will.