Tristan’s Landlord-Tenant Law Blog
Latest EPA Proposed Changes to "Renovate Right" Rules -- Deadline to Provide Feedback July 6th
ALERT! The latest EPA proposal will require dust sampling and lab testing clearance on many small jobs. The EPA estimates $160 per room in testing cost. In WI testing can only be done by state certified risk assessors and the cost is about $240 per room. So a repair to a damaged door jamb could cost ten times as much as it does today, and many times more than that if ...
ALERT! The latest EPA proposal will require dust sampling and lab testing clearance on many small jobs. The EPA estimates $160 per room in testing cost. In WI testing can only be done by state certified risk assessors and the cost is about $240 per room. So a repair to a damaged door jamb could cost ten times as much as it does today, and many times more than that if you were a do it yourselfer.
From the Federal Register (Link Below) #2 and #4 are the "gotchas."
Dust wipe testing must be performed after all renovations involving:
- Use of a heat gun at temperatures below 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit
- Removal or replacement of window or door frames
- Scraping 60 ft [2] or more of painted surfaces
- Removing more than 40 ft [2] of trim, molding, cabinets, or other fixtures.
Link to the proposed rule in the Federal Register
The 60 day comment period ends July 6th, 2010
Read the comments submitted by the Apartment Association of Southeastern WI and links to the EPA comment page at:
http://www.renovatorrules.com/
Make sure you post some feedback. This is one of the biggest changes to affect our industry and these changes are huge and will put many contractors (and landlords) out of business. Fines for violating these new laws can be as much as $32,500 per each violation.
AASEW's New "Mentor's Corner" to Debut on June 21st
At the next membership meeting of the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW), to be held on June 21, 2010, the AASEW will be debuting its new "Mentor's Corner" for all AASEW members.The "Mentor's Corner" will be held at 6:30 pm prior to the general meeting. The "Corner" will be staffed by one or more "seasoned" landlords who will be ready to answer your non-legal questions about any aspect ...
At the next membership meeting of the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin (AASEW), to be held on June 21, 2010, the AASEW will be debuting its new "Mentor's Corner" for all AASEW members.
The "Mentor's Corner" will be held at 6:30 pm prior to the general meeting. The "Corner" will be staffed by one or more "seasoned" landlords who will be ready to answer your non-legal questions about any aspect of landlording. This is the place to be to get "street-smart" answers from landlords that have already "been there and done that."
Come and ask all those nagging questions that you have been afraid to ask such as how to deal with such as the tenant that pays rent lat every month, how to deal with parking problems, intra-tenant disputes, what to do when tenants fail to mow the lawn, chronic complainers . . . .
The "Mentor's Corner" will be held at 6:30 pm before every AASEW membership meeting (which are always held on the 3rd Monday of each month) at the Best Western Hotel located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield.
Hope to see you there.
Update On Landlords' Lawsuit Against City of Milwaukee and Its Rental Inspection Ordinance
There has not been a lot of media reporting on the lawsuit brought by three landlords against the City of Milwaukee and its rental inspection ordinance so I thought I would take the time to update you on its status.If you are unfamiliar with the basics of the lawsuit you should refer to my earlier post on the topic.The City of Milwaukee has filed a Motion To Dismiss the Landlords' lawsuit. Essentially ...
There has not been a lot of media reporting on the lawsuit brought by three landlords against the City of Milwaukee and its rental inspection ordinance so I thought I would take the time to update you on its status.
If you are unfamiliar with the basics of the lawsuit you should refer to my earlier post on the topic.
The City of Milwaukee has filed a Motion To Dismiss the Landlords' lawsuit. Essentially the City is arguing that the lawsuit against it should be dimissed because the City was not provided the proper notice of the landlords' claims prior to the lawsuit being filed. In Wisconsin, if a person wants to sue a government entity - which would include the City of Milwaukee -- the law states that prior to the lawsuit, the government entity must be served with a Notice of Claim. The City then has 120 days to review that Notice and either attempt to settle the claim or deny the claim. If the City does not deny the claim within the 120 days it will be deemed denied anyway. After the 120 days have passed, a person then has 6 months in which to file the lawsuit. If more than 6 months passes then the person would be precluded from filing the lawsuit.
The reasoning behind what is called the "Notice of Claim" statute (Sec. 893.80, Wis. Stats.) is allegedly to allow the government an opportunity to settle a claim in order to avoid expensive litigation. A secondary reason for the requirement is to provide the government with enough information so that it can budget accordingly for settlement or litigation.
As a quick aside: I have sued a government entity on behalf of a client in the past so I am familiar with the Notice of Cliam statute. In my opinion the government does very little during the 120 days after it is served notice. The typical reaction is to ignore the claim and not even take the time to deny it but rather to allow the 120 days to pass after which the claim will be automatically denied. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that based on my experience that the government typically ignores the Notice of Claim that is served upon it just to see if the aggrieved person will actually file a lawsuit. It costs very little to file a Notice of Claim (which often is done without the assistance of an attorney) but it is expensive to file a lawsuit. The government has little to no interest to pay money to someone unless it knows the individual who filed the claim is serious. Essentially the Notice of Claim statute is a "legal hoop" that the government makes you jump through to see how high you will jump. There may little to no reason for you to jump, but nontheless, jump you must.
In its response brief, the plaintiffs argue that a formal notice of claim need not always be served as there are exceptions to this requirement. The plaintiff landlords rely on a recent Court of Appeals decision, Kuehne v. Burdette, which held that the Notice of Claim statute does not always require a formal notice of claim to be served nor is it always required for a plaintiff to wait 120 days before filing a lawsuit against the government.
The plaintiff landlords make three key arguements in their brief in opposition to the City's motion to dismiss:
1. Because the City's Rental Inspection Ordinance became law on January 1, 2010 -- just 22 days after it was passed by the Common Council -- and because the nature of the lawsuit is to determine whether or not the ordinance is constitutional, the plaintiffs were unable to comply with the notice of claim statute.
2. The City had actual notice of the claim even if a formal notice of claim was not served on it.
3. The City sufferred no prejudice as a result of the plaintiffs filing the lawsuit without first filing a formal notice of claim.
The plaintiffs' first argument is very similar to the one made in the Kuehne case. In Kuehne, five residents of a town filed an injunction against the Town of Ledgeview in order to prevent it from holding a referendum on whether or not the town should incorporate. The court in Kuehne stated that the notice of claim statute probably did not apply in the context of the lawsuit because it is illogical that a town can use lack of notice as a defense when the Town by its own actions made compliance with the notice of claim statute impossible.
The plaintiff landlords argue that the exact same situation in Kuehne is at play in the lawsuit against the City of Milwaukee. The City adopted the new ordinance and Mayor Barrett signed it into law 22 days later. If the plaintiffs had been required to file a notice of claim the City would have been under no legal obligation to respond to the notice until approximately May 1, 2010. By that time the rental inspection ordinance would have been in effect for a minimum of 4 months without a court being allowed to examine the constitutionality of the ordinance. The City can't use the notice of claim defense in order to allow it to move forward with its unconstitutional ordinance.
The plaintiffs' second argument is that they City had actual notice of the claim because the plaintiffs, through the actions of the AASEW, advised the City of its concerns and objections to the proposed ordinance as eary as October 29, 2009. On October 29th yours truly sent a letter to the Common Council pointing out the various constitutional problems with the ordinance. Additionally, the AASEW's attorney (who is also the attorneyfor the plaintiff landlords) also sent a letter to the City Attorney on the same date setting forth the myriad of problems with the proposed ordinance. Additionally there were numerous communications between the AASEW, its attorneys, and the alderman that sponsored the ordinance (Nic Kovac) and the DNS Commisioner. So the City had actual notice of the plaintiffs' claims approximately two months prior to the filing of the lawsuit. By contrast, in the Kuehne case the plaintiff gave notice to the Town on the same day as the lawsuit was filed and the Court of Appeals found that notice to have been sufficient.
Finally, the plaintiffs argue that the City was not prejudiced by the lack of a formal notice of claim. If the purpose of the notice requirement is to allow a government entity time to potentially resolve a claim, the fact that the AASEW 9of which the plaintiffs are members) notified the City of the problems with the ordinance and even met to discuss the potential problems, demonstrates that the City had the opportunity to resolve the issue if it wanted to. In essence the City is arguing that the plaintiff should be required to jump through the legal hoop for the sake of jumping rather than because the jumping serves an actual purpose.
The City was allowed the opportunity to have the last word so it did file a reply brief to the plaintiffs' brief in oppostion to the motion to dismiss.
I would point out that even if the City should prevail on its motion to dismiss, all that this will do is cause delay. A notice of claim has already been filed and served on the City (just in case) and another lawsuit will be filed if needed. So essentially the City's motion, if successful, will just delay things rather then address the underlying issue -- whether or not the rental inspection ordinance is constitutional as written.
A hearing on the City's motion to dismiss is scheduled to be heard before Judge Timothy Witkowiak on May 21, 2010 at 9:30 am in room 412 of the Milwaukee County Courthouse. The hearing, as most legal proceedings are, is open to the public. For those of you unable to attend, I will provide you with an update hopefully during the week of June 1st after I have returned from my upcoming wedding and honeymoon.
Do Not Miss Next AASEW Meeting on How To Manage The Financial Side of Your Rental Properties
On Monday April 19, 2010 at 7 pm the AASEW will hold its monthly membership meeting. This meeting will focus on how to manage the financial side of you rental property business. The AASEW is very excited to have Mr. Tim Nolan, CPA of Nolan Accounting Center as the featured speaker.Mr. Nolan works with smal businesses and property owners and gives special focus to income ...
On Monday April 19, 2010 at 7 pm the AASEW will hold its monthly membership meeting. This meeting will focus on how to manage the financial side of you rental property business. The AASEW is very excited to have Mr. Tim Nolan, CPA of Nolan Accounting Center as the featured speaker.
Mr. Nolan works with smal businesses and property owners and gives special focus to income taxes and business management.
I have known Tim personally and worked with him for the past several years. This should be a very informative meeting and I hope to see everyone there.
The meeting is held at the Best Western Midway Hotel on 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield. Meeting will start promptly at 7 pm.
The AASEW will be holding its Trader's Corner (where you can meet with other members to buy, trade and sell rental properties) at 6:30 prior to the main meeting.
AASEW Trader's Corner To Be Held Prior to Monthly Meeting on Monday, March 15th
Are you thinking about buying or selling or trading? Or, maybe you're just wondering where the RE market is currently at. Or, maybe you know a non-member (future member?) who is. No matter, because all are welcome to join us at the new AASEW Traders' Corner.If that isn't enough, check this out. The Traders' Corner is also a great place to find a buyer for that truck you no longer ...
Are you thinking about buying or selling or trading? Or, maybe you're just wondering where the RE market is currently at. Or, maybe you know a non-member (future member?) who is. No matter, because all are welcome to join us at the new AASEW Traders' Corner.
If that isn't enough, check this out. The Traders' Corner is also a great place to find a buyer for that truck you no longer need or someone selling their over-supply of rehab materials. Whatever it is that you are looking to find or trying to sell that is related to our business, this is the place to be.
If all of that still isn't enough, consider the networking possibilities.
When? Monday, March 15th, 6:30 - 7:00 PM
(One half hour before the AASEW General Meeting)
Where? Best Western Motel, 1005 S. Moorland Rd.
(I-94 to Exit 301A, then south 1/4 mile)
We look forward to seeing you there.
LANDLORD BOOT CAMP: Only 4 Open Seats Remain
UPDATE 2/17/10 - WE ARE AT FULL CAPACITY FOR LANDLORD BOOT CAMP ON 2/27/10. If you are interested in attending please contact Paulette at (414) 276-7378 or paulette@apartmentassoc.org and she will put your name on a "waiting list" and contact you should a seat become available. Thank You T ________________________________________________________ We had a great AASEW ...
Landlords Should Attend EPA Lead Renovation Meeting On Feb. 15th
The Bad News: Those of you who have been following along on this list have heard about the new EPA Law, beginning April 22, 2010, that regulates any renovation work that disturbs 6 sq. ft. or more of paint per room, 20 sq. ft. or more of exterior paint, or involves windows. This law specifically includes rental property owners, management companies and their employees. Your workers and company ...
This law will increase the cost of doing work as well as subject violators to fines of up to $32,500 per day/violation.. You really don't want to make a mistake here.
AASEW's Traders' Corner To Be Introduced on Feb. 15th, Prior to Monthly Membership Meeting.
The AASEW is constantly striving to make our monthly membership meetings more interactive, informative, and fun for our members. Toward that end, we have formed a committee comprised of 3 board members (Alan Rusk, Kim Queen & John Coons) to explore and suggest ideas to improve the AASEW's monthly meetings. Our attendence has been up over the past year and we want to maintain (and even increase) this trend.The first of ...
The AASEW is constantly striving to make our monthly membership meetings more interactive, informative, and fun for our members. Toward that end, we have formed a committee comprised of 3 board members (Alan Rusk, Kim Queen & John Coons) to explore and suggest ideas to improve the AASEW's monthly meetings. Our attendence has been up over the past year and we want to maintain (and even increase) this trend.
The first of the ideas to be implemented will be the Traders' Corner. The Traders' Corner will meet from 6:30 pm - 7 pm on Monday, February 15, 2010 (and will continue to meet 1/2 hour before the start of the AASEW's regular monthly meetings) at the Best Wester Hotel located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield.
The goal of the Corner is to allow for members to meet and discuss their real estate "deals." If you have a rental property that you are looking to sell or if you would like to purchase additional rental properties - the Traders' Corner is where you want to be. Come and tell us about how you found your most recent "deal" and how you analyzed it and determined that it was something that you should go forward with.
The meeting will be very informal and we will let those in attendence dictate what we talk about. Ideally we hope this new event will allow members to meet and interact with one another more and allow for all of us to learn from one another. Our members possess a wealth of real estate knowledge and experience and that is something that the AASEW is hoping will be shared.
Did Your Tenant Write You A Worthless Check? Consider New Restitution Program
One of my earliest blog posts, back when I had just started Tristan's Landlord-Tenant Law Blog, was about the fact that the City of Milwaukee Police Department had a policy in place where they refused to investigate crimes in which a tenant made their rent payment with a worthless check or stopped payment on the check. Shortly thereafter I wrote about a new diversion program that was being ...
One of my earliest blog posts, back when I had just started Tristan's Landlord-Tenant Law Blog, was about the fact that the City of Milwaukee Police Department had a policy in place where they refused to investigate crimes in which a tenant made their rent payment with a worthless check or stopped payment on the check. Shortly thereafter I wrote about a new diversion program that was being created to assist landlords in such a situation.
I was attending the February monthly meeting for Milwaukee RING (Real Estate Investors Networking Group) this past Monday and they had a speaker from the company that is now running this new program. Mr. Rufus McNealy of Financial Crimes Services, LLC (FCS) spoke to us about the diversion/accountability program that is now in full effect.
Mr. McNealy handed out a very informative guide outlining the program and including the necessary applications to enter into the program.
With the current recession the District Attorney's Office says that they are receiving more and more complaints of people passing worthless checks. Due to limited funding, the DA's office cannot afford to prosecute all of these these crimes. So the DA's office and FCS partnered to try to get some of that money back for the victims -- and this includes landlords.
The goals of the program are:
1. Increase the amount of restitution returned to victims of bad checks.
2. Increase the accountability of all worthless check writers (regardless of the amount of the check).
3. Educate local merchants about more effective check acceptance procedures.
4. Reduce the risk of repeat worthless check activity through training.
There is no cost to any landlord that wishes to try this diversion program. All costs of the program are born by the worthless check writer.
The program will handle the following kinds of checks: NSF, Account Closed, Stop Payment, Refer to Maker, Business to Business, RENT checks, debit card charge backs, ACH (Automatic Clearing House) charge backs, ACH NSF's and electronic checks received in Milwaukee County that do not exceed $2,500.
The following types of checks will not be handled by the program: second-party checks, payroll checks, checks that are currently in collections with a collection agency or attorney, and promissory notes or any other situation in which there has been agreement to hold the check for deposit or credit extension.
The final two pages of the PDF that I have linked to above are the "Memorandum of Understanding" which the landlord would review, sign and return to FCS, and a Preliminary Worthless Check Report which the landlord should complete and send to the Milwaukee County DA Program. Hold on to these two pages . . . just in case you find yourself in a situation where this program can help you.
Once FCS receives the above info from the landlord the company will attempt to contact the person that passed the bad check. The criminal will then have the option of (1) entering into the program and paying restitution to the victim or (2) refuse to enter into the program in which case the matter will be sent for potential prosecution.
It is my understanding that FCS is also partnering with Racine County and Kenosha County in addition to Milwaukee County. FCS is not currently working with Waukesha County.
Those of you that are interested in learning more about this program may contact Mr. McNealy at (414) 393-9385 or visit his company's website at www.financialcrimes.net
The AASEW has also schedule Mr. McNealy to speak about this program at its May meeting.
LANDLORD BOOT CAMP: Everything You Need To Know About Residential Landlord-Tenant Law in WI
I will be presenting an all-day seminar on residential landlord tenant law in Wisconsin for the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, Inc. (AASEW). The seminar is entitled "Landlord Boot Camp" and will take place on Saturday, February 27, 2010 from approx. 8:30 am - 5 pm at the Clarion Hotel located at 5311 S. Howell Avenue in Milwaukee. The cost will be $159 for AASEW members ...
Oral Arguments On Important Landlord Case To Be Heard on January 6, 2010
The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the case of Maryland Arms L.P. v. Connell on Wednesday, January 6, 2010. This is a very important case for landlords as the decision will affect a landlord's ability to contract with his/her tenant.You can learn what the case is about by reviewing my earlier posts from May 28, 2009 and October 15, 2009.Oral arguments will be streamed at ...
The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the case of Maryland Arms L.P. v. Connell on Wednesday, January 6, 2010. This is a very important case for landlords as the decision will affect a landlord's ability to contract with his/her tenant.
You can learn what the case is about by reviewing my earlier posts from May 28, 2009 and October 15, 2009.
Oral arguments will be streamed at http://wisconsineye.org for those that wish to watch.
The exact time that for the Maryland Arms arguments is unknown. The case is scheduled to be heard second. The first case starts at 9:45 am. More than likely -- and assuming everything runs on schedule -- the case will be argued before 11 am.
For those of you new to oral arguments, the Wisconsin Supreme Court justices will allow each side to summarize their arguments (which have already been submitted via briefs). The justices will also interrupt the attorneys in order to have them answer specific questions that the justices may have or to attempt to get the attorneys to concede certain arguments. Sometimes the grilling by the justices can be harsh. The justices will not issue a final decision on Wednesday. A final decision will be issued many months later in writing.
The AASEW, along with three other Wisconsin apartment associations, hired legal counsel to submit an amicus curiae brief setting forth the concerns of the apartment industry as a whole, with regard to the specific facts of this case. The lawyer for the apartment associations will also be allowed time to present our argument to the justices.
Upcoming AASEW Meetings, Topics & Speakers
The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, Inc. (AASEW) has some very interesting speakers and topics for its upcoming monthly membership meetings in 2010. All meetings are held on the 3rd Monday of the month at 7 pm at the Best Western Midway Hotel which is located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield. There is no cost to attend the meetings. If you are not yet a member of ...
The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, Inc. (AASEW) has some very interesting speakers and topics for its upcoming monthly membership meetings in 2010. All meetings are held on the 3rd Monday of the month at 7 pm at the Best Western Midway Hotel which is located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield. There is no cost to attend the meetings. If you are not yet a member of AASEW, attending one of our monthly membership meetings is a great way to see what the organization is all about and learn how membership can benefit you as a landlord, property manager or vendor.
Our January 18th meeting will feature Attorney Robert Muten of Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren S.C. Atty. Muten will speak on the issue of employees vs. independent contractors. Whether a person is an employee of your business or an independant contractor will affect all of us at some point in our lives if the issue has not already confronted you. I have done research on this very interesting topic for clients in the past and the determination as to whether you are an employee or an independant contractor is very fact-specific. You will not want to miss this very informative meeting with Atty. Muten.
Steven Antholt of the State of Wisconsin’s Department of Health Services will speak at the February 15th AASEW meeting. He will discuss the new Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair and Painting Program. This new program will affect everyone that owns or works on rental property and who “disturbs” more than 6 feet of interior space or 20 feet of exterior space, and/or is replacing any doors or windows in pre-1978 housing. This new law requires individuals to get specific training prior to its enactment date and to comply with a myriad of rules and regulations. The fines for ignoring this new law will be stiff --- so it would be in all of our best interests to be in attendence at this meeting.
On March 15th, Stacy Hegg, Property Manager for Wellston Apartments, will discuss best practices in rental property management and provide us with some management tips that we can use when managing our own properties. I have had the pleasure of co-presenting a seminar with Stacy a few months ago and found her to be a dynamic, knowledgeable, and enjoyable speaker. Come learn how to better manage your rentals from an expert in the industry.
I hope to see all of you at these future meetings.
I would like to wish everyone a healthy, safe, and happy holiday season. I apologize for the lack of substantive blog articles this past week but I have been very busy dealing with all of the crowds while trying to finish my last minute holiday shopping : )
Rep. Marlin Schneider Amends AB-340 (CCAP Bill)
On December 2, 2009, Rep. Marlin Schneider (D-Wisconsin Rapids) made an amendment to AB-340. Referred to as Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 to 2009 AB 340, this revised bill essentially would create two versions of the CCAP database. Schneider's amendment appears to be -- based on its timing at least -- a partial response to the Apartment Association of SE Wisconsin's critical response to a memo that Schneider sent to other members of the Wisconsin ...
On December 2, 2009, Rep. Marlin Schneider (D-Wisconsin Rapids) made an amendment to AB-340. Referred to as Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 to 2009 AB 340, this revised bill essentially would create two versions of the CCAP database. Schneider's amendment appears to be -- based on its timing at least -- a partial response to the Apartment Association of SE Wisconsin's critical response to a memo that Schneider sent to other members of the Wisconsin legislature and staff on November 20, 2009. The problem with Rep. Schneider's amendment, if it is indeed a response to the AASEW's criticisms, is that it ignores everything that the AASEW attempted to explain to him.
The original AB 340 can be read in its entirety at www.DefeatAB340.org. This site also contains background information on the sponsors of AB 340, responses from across Wisconsin to Schneider's bill, and Schneider's earlier attempts to restrict CCAP and prevent landlords from legally screening rental applicants.
Version #1
Under the amended AB 340, the first version of CCAP would remain exactly as we now know it. It would continue to provide data on pending cases and completed cases that were resolved by stipulated dismissal, acquittal, or motion. It would also continue to provide information as to all original criminal charges filed even if those charges were later reduced or dismissed.
However, this fully transparent version of CCAP would be restricted to only a "chosen few," namely:
1. Justices, judges, magistrates, court commissioners, and other employees of state, federal, or municipal courts and agencies who require access to court documents and records during the course of their employement.
2. Law enforcement officers.
3. Attorneys and their employees.
4. Members of the Wisconsin Newspaper Assoc., the Wisconsin Broadcaster's Assoc., and any other Wisconsin media organization designated by the director of state courts.
5. A debt collector licensed under Sec. 218.04, Wis. Stats.
Version #2
The second version of CCAP would be a redacted version (just as was set forth in the original AB 340) and would exclude any and all information about any civil or criminal case that had not yet been resolved by: (1) a finding of guilt, (2) a finding of liability, (3) an order of eviction, or (4) the issuance of a restraining order or injunction.
Under the revised AB 340, a person would still be able to request that the director of state courts remove all CCAP information relating to that individual's case if it did not result in a finding of guilt, liability, eviction judgment, or TRO/Injunction, or if it was reopened, vacated, set aside or overturned on appeal. Thus, even the "chosen few" detailed above would still not have access to this information if an affected individual made a request to remove it from CCAP.
The revised AB 340 appears to have eliminated the requirement that all users must register with the Director of State Courts and pay a $10 fee. However, still intact in the amended bill is the requirement that a person who has been denied employment, housing, or a public accomodation, be informed that said decision was made after reviewing information contained on CCAP. The intentional failure to comply with this section could result in a $1,000 fine.
The revised AB 340 is not an improvement over its predecessor. Yes, I guess it does allow a select few to access most of the information currently contained on CCAP but what about those individuals who are not included? Landlords, employers, moms and dads, and everyone else excluded from accessing the info on the "real CCAP" are still being prevented from using CCAP to obtain information that falls under Wisconsn's open records law.
I wonder just how much time Rep. Schneider and his staff spent drafting the revised AB 340? Since the revised version still ignores Wisconsin's open records law and still hinders a landlord's ability to properly - and legally - screen a prospective renter, I hope that they didn't spend too much time on it because I still don't think it will pass.
What are your thoughts about this revised version of AB 340? Let me know your thoughts by sending a "comment."
AASEW Holiday Party Tonight
It is not too late to attend. You can register at the door.Cost is $25 per person.Location: Clarion Hotel at 5311 S. Howell Ave.Music and lots of Food. Cash bar.forget about all of the anti-landlord legislation being drafted and celebrate the holidays with us.
It is not too late to attend. You can register at the door.
Cost is $25 per person.
Location: Clarion Hotel at 5311 S. Howell Ave.
Music and lots of Food. Cash bar.
forget about all of the anti-landlord legislation being drafted and celebrate the holidays with us.
AASEW Continues To Fight Against The City of Milwaukee's Residential Rental Certificate Program
The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, Inc. (AASEW) continues its attempt to defeat the recently passed ordinance creating a Residential Rental Certificate Program in two areas of the city. On December 7, 2009, the AASEW issued a Press Release urging the mayor to veto the legislation in order to avoid expensive litigation. Additonally, President of the AASEW Tristan Pettit wrote a letter to Mayor Tom Barrett pointing out ...
The Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, Inc. (AASEW) continues its attempt to defeat the recently passed ordinance creating a Residential Rental Certificate Program in two areas of the city. On December 7, 2009, the AASEW issued a Press Release urging the mayor to veto the legislation in order to avoid expensive litigation.
Additonally, President of the AASEW Tristan Pettit wrote a letter to Mayor Tom Barrett pointing out many of the legal problems with the ordinance. A similar letter was sent to the members of the Common Council prior to their vote last week - which went ignored. The letter specifically delineates 6 of the many structural and legal problems with the ordinance and encourages the mayor to veto the legislation in order to spare the city the time and expense of defending the poorly drafted legislation in court.
The Mayor has until the close of business on Thursday, December 10, 2009 to sign the legislation or else it would go back to the Common Council for reconsideration. If the Mayor vetoes the ordinance then the Common Council would have to garner 10 votes (from the 15 members) in order to override the veto.
MILWAUKEE'S RESIDENTIAL RENTAL CERTIFICATE ORDINANCE PASSES
Earlier today by a vote of 9-5 the city of Milwaukee's Residential Rental Certificate Program ordinance was passed by the Common Council. Voting in favor of the new ordinance were Aldermen Ashanti Hamilton (1st district), Nic Kovac (3rd district), Robert Bauman (4th district), Milele Coggs (6th district), Willie Wade (7th district), Robert Puente (9th district), Michael Murphy (10th district), Terry Witkowski (13 district), and Willie Hines, Jr. (15th district). Voting against ...
Earlier today by a vote of 9-5 the city of Milwaukee's Residential Rental Certificate Program ordinance was passed by the Common Council.
Voting in favor of the new ordinance were Aldermen Ashanti Hamilton (1st district), Nic Kovac (3rd district), Robert Bauman (4th district), Milele Coggs (6th district), Willie Wade (7th district), Robert Puente (9th district), Michael Murphy (10th district), Terry Witkowski (13 district), and Willie Hines, Jr. (15th district).
Voting against the ordinance were Aldermen James Bohl, Jr. (5th district), Robert Donovan (8th district), Joe Dudzik (11th district), James Witkowiak (12th district), and Tony Zielinski (14th district).
Alderman Joe Davis, Sr. was not present and did not vote.
There was very little discussion on the proposed ordinance prior to its vote. Alderman Kovac (the primary sponsor of the ordinance) spoke in favor of the revised ordinance and gave a summary of the revisions that were made. Alderman Robert Donovan then spoke out against the ordinance and summarized some of the criticism that citizens had with the proposal as expressed at the public hearing earlier. Alderman Murphy then spoke in favor of the ordinance and emphasized that it is a pilot program that will be reviewed each year.
If you are interested in viewing the video recording of the vote and other related information just click here.
This new ordinance will make it mandatory for all landlords who own rental property in two designated areas of the city (the UWM area on the city's east side and the Lindsay Heights neighborhood on the city's north side) to apply for a rental certificate in order to continue renting out their rental properties. When applying for the certificate the owner will need to pay a $85 per unit fee and allow an inspector from the city's Department of Neighborhood Services to inspect the interior of the unit.
For more detailed information on this ordinance please refer to my prior post.
The AASEW was opposed to this ordinance and had hired legal counsel to point out the various legal problems with the ordinance and its drafting to the ordinance's sponsor, Alderman Nic Kovac. On a positive note, the original ordinance that was proposed was revised to address some of the issues and concerns that were brought to light by the AASEW. A copy of the newly enacted ordinance (Proposed Substitute C) can be read in its entirety here.
The Department of Neighborhood Services also put together a Residential Rental Inspection Program Preinspection Checklist which it is assumed will be sent to the owners of rental property in the two designated areas prior to the inspection. This checklist sets forth the specific types of violations that DNS will be looking for during its inspection. While the checklist is still pretty extensive it is still better then just having the subjective term "disqualifying violation" in the ordinance as was the case with the prior version.
This ordinance will become effective January 1, 2010.
As this ordinance is phased in please let me know your thoughts as to how it is being implemented. This is a pilot program and it will be reviewed annually so any and all input from affected landlords is vital.
LLC's - PART 2: How To Insure They Protect You From Personal Liability
In my October 28, 2009 post entitled LLC's - Part 1: Why You Should Consider Using Them To Hold Your Rental Property, I indicated that in the near future I would write a second post on LLC's and include a link to the outline that I drafted and presented to the AASEW membership at the October monthly meeting. My portion of the presentation on LLC's focused on ...
In my October 28, 2009 post entitled LLC's - Part 1: Why You Should Consider Using Them To Hold Your Rental Property, I indicated that in the near future I would write a second post on LLC's and include a link to the outline that I drafted and presented to the AASEW membership at the October monthly meeting. My portion of the presentation on LLC's focused on the following topics:
1. General information on business entities (corporations, partnerships etc.) and how they are distinct from an individual person.
2. How those general principles apply to LLC's.
3. What is "piercing the corporate veil" or "disregarding the corporate fiction" and what are the various tests and factors that courts look at when evaluating whether or not they should hold an individual liable for the actions or debts of the LLC under the "alter ego" theory.
You can read my outline here.
MILWAUKEE'S RESIDENTIAL RENTAL CERTIFICATE PROGRAM VOTE PUSHED BACK 1 CYCLE
The Common Council did not vote on the passing of the city's proposed Residential Rental Certificate Program earlier today as was planned. Instead the Comon Council voted 9-5 to hold the proposed ordinance for 1 cycle (1 month) for further review. The proposed ordinance, which would require all rental property owners in the UWM-area and Lindsay Heights neighborhood on the north side of Milwaukee to pay an $85 fee per unit fee ...
The Common Council did not vote on the passing of the city's proposed Residential Rental Certificate Program earlier today as was planned. Instead the Comon Council voted 9-5 to hold the proposed ordinance for 1 cycle (1 month) for further review.
The proposed ordinance, which would require all rental property owners in the UWM-area and Lindsay Heights neighborhood on the north side of Milwaukee to pay an $85 fee per unit fee and submit to an internal inspection of in order to be able to rent out their property, passed out of the ZND committee last week by a vote of 3-2. The proposed ordinance was to be voted on by the Common Council earlier today.
In response to the setback of having the proposed ordinance pass out of committee the AASEW, who represents approximately 680 landlords in Milwaukee and the surrounding areas, retained legal counsel to review the ordinance for procedural and drafting errors. Errors were found and were communicated to the City Attorney. The AASEW wrote to the President of the Commom Council and the various council members and pointed out its many concerns with the ordinance as written.
Prior to a vote being taken as to whether or not the ordinance should be passed, a motion was made by Alderman Donovan to hold the ordinance for one cycle (1 month) to further review any problems and concerns. This motion passed by a vote of 9-5. It is assumed that the ordinance will be revised and then referred back to the ZND committee for an additional public hearing.
I will keep you advised as to what happens next.
For additional information on the proposed Residential Rental Certificate Program please refer to my earlier post.
Read Tom Daykin, of the Journal Sentinel, blog post about this change of events here.
LLC's - PART 1: Why You Should Consider Using Them To Hold Your Rental Property
The AASEW's October monthly membership meeting focused on the issue of LLC's and why you should consider using this business entity to hold your rental properties. Attorney Lydia Chartre of Petrie and Stocking S.C. spoke to the membership about several issues related to LLC's including: - Why create an LLC? - Steps to create an LLC
FREE SEMINAR ON LLC'S - WHY YOU NEED THEM AND HOW TO INSURE THEY PROTECT YOU FROM PERSONAL LIABILITY
Lydia Chartre and I will be presenting a free seminar at the AASEW's October monthly meeting on October 19, 2009 at 7 pm. The meeting will be held at the Best Western Midway Hotel which is located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield.Lydia and I will be speaking on LLC's and why you should consider using this form of business entity to hold your rental property and ...
Lydia Chartre and I will be presenting a free seminar at the AASEW's October monthly meeting on October 19, 2009 at 7 pm. The meeting will be held at the Best Western Midway Hotel which is located at 1005 S. Moorland Road in Brookfield.
Lydia and I will be speaking on LLC's and why you should consider using this form of business entity to hold your rental property and what you must do when handling your LLC to insure that your personal assets are protected.
Lydia will be discussing the nuts and bolts of LLC's including:
- Why you may want to form an LLC to hold your rental property
- The necessary steps to form an LLC
- Information that you (or an attorney) will need to form your LLC
I will speak on the topic of what formalities you will need to follow when handling your LLC to insure that your personal assets will be protected. While the general law is that an LLC -- just like a corporation -- is a separate and distinct entity from its individual members, there are instances where courts have allowed an injured party or a creditor to "pierce the corporate veil" or hold the individual personally liable for the actions and/or debts of the LLC.
Last summer I defended a client that was sued personally for the debt of his then defunct corporation. The creditor attempted to "pierce the corporate veil" and hold my client and his new corporation responsible for the debts of his prior company. I will draw from my research, arguments and the experience that I gained during this multi-day trial to explain what you must do in order to keep the shiled of your LLC and avoid anyone suing you personally for its actions or debts.
If you have never been to an AASEW meeting before -- or if you haven't been to one in awhile -- I would strongly encourage you to attend this seminar. It will be filled with lots of practical infromation. I hope to see you there.