Last fall, when the City of Ludington announced and adopted its 2015 Budget, they had noted that over $26,000 in new revenues were expected if the city launched a "rental inspection" program (see p. 16 here):
But even before that, there was talk at an August 18, 2014 workshop, where rental inspections were part of the city's 2015 (fundraising) goals:
So it came as no surprise that this topic would show itself this year-- the surprise is that it hasn't been visited until now. The City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews) in today's newspaper brought out the news that the June 4th workshop scheduled at 3:30 PM at City Hall would be the time for landlords to air their voices about what they plan to do.
This also wasn't a surprise, as I heard from a landlord just last night about how thrilled they were with the letter they got from the City announcing their plans to extract even more money out of them. I haven't yet seen the full proposal, and of course, the COLDNews only tells us what our benevolent (yet very greedy) city leaders want put out. The article follows
Ludington’s landlords could soon have to pay the city to inspect their rental units every three years to ensure there are no health or safety violations.
It’s a possibility some landlords oppose, including Jim Schiebner, who described the $75-per-unit inspection fee as an extra tax levied on landlords.
City Manager John Shay said the city council has considered implementing a rental property inspection program for many years and is again thinking of putting one in place. To that end, he said, the city mailed information about the proposal to Ludington landlords and invited them to a meeting about the issue that is scheduled for 3:30 p.m. Thursday, June 4 at city hall.
Shay said the council’s building and licensing committee is looking into the issue and wants landlord feedback before bringing the issue to the full council for a vote.
We will update this issue as new information comes out. In the meantime, what do you think about this policy? Do you believe it is legal to raise funds like this? I am already on record asking a question at the November 24, 2014 meeting: "The as-of-yet unpassed rental inspection program has been estimated to bring in $27,000 in rental inspection fees for the upcoming year; how does the city plan on doing this and will this be complaint-based or mandatory for those who rent property?" Over seven months later, those issues are still not addressed fully.
Manistee See Manistee Do
As a Public Service I will save Mayor Cox and his committee some time seeing what other cities do about rental inspections.
Seeing as we seem to mimic what happens in Manistee ie the grass ordinance and the junk vehicle ordinance ( did COL ever pass the vehicle thing?) these links contain a template of what the future holds.
Maybe it is time that what happens in Manistee should stays in Manistee at least at the City Government Level.
Cox should get over his case of "Manistee Envy".
I have no idea what the dates are on the links or if Mark Niesen Rental Inspector is the current inspector or if Manistee is still without an inspector reguarding the Sept 1 2014 announcement that inspections are on hold subject to a restructiing of the department.
The reason why we seem to be following the footprints of Manistee is not so much any case of Manistee envy by the new mayor, but more so because we have the same idiot attorneys they do drafting the same laws-- except Ludington's laws are more severe since the lawyers don't live here. Attorney George V. Saylor III and Richard Wilson look at the Bill of Rights as an inconvenience, an impediment that must be overcome in order to showcase their mastery in law-crafting without serious thoughts of consequences.
The third link you supply is illustrative of the arbitrary nature of what they want to enforce with the new inspections (a select part of that document is above). Most places, rentals or not, in my neighborhood fall short of these requirements in at least one or more ways, but are still very livable.
You'll shoot your eye out kid...er maybe both eyes