PH-1 21-1261 An Ordinance to Amend Section 8:530 of Chapter 105 (Housing: Lease Agreements and Entry to Show Residential Premises) of Title VIII (Building Regulations) of the Ann Arbor City Code (ORD-21-22)
It's currently a lose/lose situation for these UM students. They are being forced to knock on strangers doors to ask for a tour which is ridiculous. Landlords should have the right to rent/sell property as long as we follow fair housing guidelines. With this new proposed ordinance, these challenges will be exacerbated as UM students will have even less time to find places they would like to live. This change would certainly create more demand, raising rent rates that are already expensive. 70 days from the start of a lease is plenty of time for tenants to figure out if they would like to extend their lease. I'm not sure how any of this is within contract law and I fear the city will face many lawsuits if this passes. This doesn't only affect the "StudentRental Market." We rent our "non student rentals" 6 months in advance. This will force Landlords to push away more clients that are simply trying to rent out property. Rates will skyrocket.
I support this ordinance as a reasonable measure to relieve some of the pressure on all renters (not just grad student renters) to renew their leases barely into their tenancy. Please weight the arguments of actual tenants more than landlords who cynically profess to speak for them. I have navigated the local rental market for four decades, beginning as a U-M student, experiencing its full range of horrors: the minuscule vacancy rate, the outrageously high rents, the barely habitable units, the failure to make repairs, the flouting of landlord-tenant law with regard to returning security deposits. I have also rented from some good landlords. But tenants need more statutory protections. This ordinance is one small step in that direction.
If passed, this will limit a very large portion of renters (student and non-student) opportunity to find housing on an operable schedule, and seeks to satisfy an outcry from a very small rental population (grad students) who are misrepresenting the availability of units on the market currently. Simply put, this displaces more people than it will "help" place grad students into rental units.
This Ordinance is discriminatory against Undergraduate students. It puts them at a huge disadvantage to obtain housing near campus. They will be leaving town for the summer before they can even view housing. They will be forced to commit to UM dorms before Private housing providers can even show houses and gives the high rise towers unfair advantage with year round models to show. It will shove all the Undergrads into high rise towers and out of the community neighborhoods. The diversity of our campus area neighborhoods has always been a positive and allows Undergrads to be a part of Ann Arbor. You are taking away their right to secure housing ahead of time in an effort to solve a problem that is going away as more and more housing is being built and available. Undergrads deserve the right to choose and secure housing prior to leaving town and before being forced to commit to UM dorms. Please reconsider rushing this failed Ordinance and listen to next years incoming students.
Property managers need to lease to different groups at different times throughout the year. Please stop using the terms "renters" and "students" interchangeably. Fewer than 50% of renters in this town are in fact students. You are viewing this too narrowly. This debate is not a city wide issue- this is a University of Michigan issue.
Leasing has become a year round process for landlords. Being a year round process, landlords can properly staff leasing agents to assist students (and non students) looking for places to live. There is no shortage of apartments available. There are plenty of units to go around and students will find a place regardless of when they choose to look. Shortening the time when leasing can occur will just make the process more rushed and landlords will not have sufficient staff to provide quality service. In addition: Landlords have and continue to invest significant dollars in our community and are based here for the long term. Landlords operate businesses here, support our community, and are a critical piece to the local economy. It is important that the landlord point of view be considered as the sustainability and viability of landlords is crucial to maintaining property values (tax revenue), and the long term economics of our community.
This ordiance is an intrusion into the business operations of property owners and property managers who pay significant taxes to support the Ann Arbor government. This will harm these businesses and the Ann Arbor rental housing market. Tenants will recieve less services because property managers will not maintain full time leasing staff. It will result in tenants having to camp out in front of management offices so they can be first in line to rent apartments. This will result in higher renewal rates for tenants and a black market for housing. The City will have significant challenges and increased costs to enforce this ordinance. City Council is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Ample housing choices are availabe throughout the year. A visit to the University of Michigan Off-Campus Housing website demonstrates the ample availability of housing only a month before students will return to campus. Ultimately, I believe that this ordinance is unconstitutional.
This seems more relevant to student housing and will be messy for the residents and landlords of large professionally managed multi-family communities. The working residents of large multi-family do not know their plans that far in advance. Landlords will be forced to "guess" at what market conditions will be 6 months early - and therefore will typically offer a renewal rate that is higher than what it normally would be in order to compensate for guessing what the market will look like 6 months out. Some lenders require one year leases and may not loan on properties with automatic lease renewals. It seems unfair that the landlord must provide 2 types of notice to the tenant, but tenant can provide any type of notice to the Landlord. A property owner should have the right, at the end of an agreed upon contract, not to extend a new contract as long as appropriate notice is given. The administrative cost to rent in Ann Arbor will be increased and ultimately passed on to the Tenants.
It's currently a lose/lose situation for these UM students. They are being forced to knock on strangers doors to ask for a tour which is ridiculous. Landlords should have the right to rent/sell property as long as we follow fair housing guidelines. With this new proposed ordinance, these challenges will be exacerbated as UM students will have even less time to find places they would like to live. This change would certainly create more demand, raising rent rates that are already expensive. 70 days from the start of a lease is plenty of time for tenants to figure out if they would like to extend their lease. I'm not sure how any of this is within contract law and I fear the city will face many lawsuits if this passes. This doesn't only affect the "StudentRental Market." We rent our "non student rentals" 6 months in advance. This will force Landlords to push away more clients that are simply trying to rent out property. Rates will skyrocket.
I support this ordinance as a reasonable measure to relieve some of the pressure on all renters (not just grad student renters) to renew their leases barely into their tenancy. Please weight the arguments of actual tenants more than landlords who cynically profess to speak for them. I have navigated the local rental market for four decades, beginning as a U-M student, experiencing its full range of horrors: the minuscule vacancy rate, the outrageously high rents, the barely habitable units, the failure to make repairs, the flouting of landlord-tenant law with regard to returning security deposits. I have also rented from some good landlords. But tenants need more statutory protections. This ordinance is one small step in that direction.
If passed, this will limit a very large portion of renters (student and non-student) opportunity to find housing on an operable schedule, and seeks to satisfy an outcry from a very small rental population (grad students) who are misrepresenting the availability of units on the market currently. Simply put, this displaces more people than it will "help" place grad students into rental units.
This Ordinance is discriminatory against Undergraduate students. It puts them at a huge disadvantage to obtain housing near campus. They will be leaving town for the summer before they can even view housing. They will be forced to commit to UM dorms before Private housing providers can even show houses and gives the high rise towers unfair advantage with year round models to show. It will shove all the Undergrads into high rise towers and out of the community neighborhoods. The diversity of our campus area neighborhoods has always been a positive and allows Undergrads to be a part of Ann Arbor. You are taking away their right to secure housing ahead of time in an effort to solve a problem that is going away as more and more housing is being built and available. Undergrads deserve the right to choose and secure housing prior to leaving town and before being forced to commit to UM dorms. Please reconsider rushing this failed Ordinance and listen to next years incoming students.
Property managers need to lease to different groups at different times throughout the year. Please stop using the terms "renters" and "students" interchangeably. Fewer than 50% of renters in this town are in fact students. You are viewing this too narrowly. This debate is not a city wide issue- this is a University of Michigan issue.
Leasing has become a year round process for landlords. Being a year round process, landlords can properly staff leasing agents to assist students (and non students) looking for places to live. There is no shortage of apartments available. There are plenty of units to go around and students will find a place regardless of when they choose to look. Shortening the time when leasing can occur will just make the process more rushed and landlords will not have sufficient staff to provide quality service. In addition: Landlords have and continue to invest significant dollars in our community and are based here for the long term. Landlords operate businesses here, support our community, and are a critical piece to the local economy. It is important that the landlord point of view be considered as the sustainability and viability of landlords is crucial to maintaining property values (tax revenue), and the long term economics of our community.
This ordiance is an intrusion into the business operations of property owners and property managers who pay significant taxes to support the Ann Arbor government. This will harm these businesses and the Ann Arbor rental housing market. Tenants will recieve less services because property managers will not maintain full time leasing staff. It will result in tenants having to camp out in front of management offices so they can be first in line to rent apartments. This will result in higher renewal rates for tenants and a black market for housing. The City will have significant challenges and increased costs to enforce this ordinance. City Council is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Ample housing choices are availabe throughout the year. A visit to the University of Michigan Off-Campus Housing website demonstrates the ample availability of housing only a month before students will return to campus. Ultimately, I believe that this ordinance is unconstitutional.
This seems more relevant to student housing and will be messy for the residents and landlords of large professionally managed multi-family communities. The working residents of large multi-family do not know their plans that far in advance. Landlords will be forced to "guess" at what market conditions will be 6 months early - and therefore will typically offer a renewal rate that is higher than what it normally would be in order to compensate for guessing what the market will look like 6 months out. Some lenders require one year leases and may not loan on properties with automatic lease renewals. It seems unfair that the landlord must provide 2 types of notice to the tenant, but tenant can provide any type of notice to the Landlord. A property owner should have the right, at the end of an agreed upon contract, not to extend a new contract as long as appropriate notice is given. The administrative cost to rent in Ann Arbor will be increased and ultimately passed on to the Tenants.