GREENFIELD — With a unanimous vote of recommendation from the Appointments and Ordinances Committee on Monday, a proposal to create a rental registry in Greenfield may potentially be voted on by the full City Council this week.
At-Large City Councilor John Garrett, in presenting the latest draft of the ordinance on Monday, shared that he has been working with various city departments, including Health Director Michael Theroux, and talking with landlords and tenants to develop language that meets the needs of the city, without creating extra burden for city staff and landlords.
The ordinance states that all owners of dwelling units (not counting exempt units, such as those not currently being rented and those operated by the Greenfield Housing Authority) must apply for a rental registry permit with the Health Department. Permits must be renewed annually for a cost of $30 per unit and the property owner must submit their contact information, and if they have a property manager, their contact information as well, along with details from a self-inspection conducted by the property owner.
The ordinance also outlines how tenants can file complaints and report violations, and how landlords can pay fines, fees and file appeals.
Residents and property owners also weighed in on the proposal during public comment on Monday, sharing thoughts both in favor of and against creating a rental registry.
Allen Constantine, a Gill resident who owns rental properties in Greenfield, said he has “great concerns” about the proposal.
“This ordinance, if passed, will open a tremendous strain on both the building owners and the Board of Health, both in time and money,” said Constantine, who is also president of the Landlords Business Association. “The cost of the fees and time spent compiling this very cumbersome ordinance … will be passed onto tenants in the form of higher rents.”
Constantine said he believes the requirements of the ordinance would strain landlords’ budgets, which would result in them being unable to properly maintain their facilities.
“This will cause an unfair financial burden on the building owner, making it even harder for them to maintain the building,” Constantine said.
Greenfield landlord Mark Zaccheo added that tenants who have concerns or issues with their residences can report the problem to the Board of Health and Building Inspections Department, and the state requires inspections to be completed every time a tenant moves in to document the condition of the property. Because of these procedures, he said adding more paperwork and registering every unit seems cumbersome and unnecessary.
“I just think that we have a system that works,” Zaccheo said.
Susan Worgaftik, coordinator of Housing Greenfield and a former Boston landlord, said that while different city departments have different lists of properties in Greenfield, there is no master list. Creating a rental registry would ensure that in case of emergencies, public safety personnel know exactly where units are, how many there are and what conditions they might be heading into.
“No one has a list with the Fire Department, Police Department, Assessor’s Office, that agreed with each other in terms of how many units there were and how many apartments there are. That’s a health and safety issue from the get-go,” Worgaftik said. “If there are four apartments in the building and the Fire Department thinks there are only three, and there’s a fire, this is a real issue.”
She added that while there is a process and procedure for tenants to report unsafe conditions, and most landlords are good about fixing issues and providing safe conditions, not all tenants feel comfortable reporting unsafe situations.
“In a housing market like the one we have right now, people are afraid to complain. I think we have some excellent landlords here who are saying, ‘Call me, I’ll take care of it.’ We also have landlords that, if you call, they start to threaten,” Worgaftik said. “What we’re trying to do is set up a situation where the tenant is able to get an inspection on a regular basis.”
Garrett said he believes the rental registry would create a valuable database for law enforcement, and added that self-inspection should not be too much work for landlords or for the Health Department.
“This is not a substantial burden. The way it is structured, a lot of it is self-executing. This is not a radical idea,” Garrett said. “The town of South Hadley is where most of this ordinance came from, and the town of South Hadley is not a communist paradise.”
Garrett continued that the ordinance would create a more structured complaint process for tenants, and better ensure they are protected from landlords, adding that the regulations have to apply to all landlords to ensure problem landlords are addressed.
“I have phone numbers of at least half a dozen people who spoke to me about their conditions, with the promise that I would never tell anybody at the Health Department about them because they’re afraid of retaliation,” he said. “The folks in this room are not the problem. … We have some great landlords in the city who are doing tremendous work, and the goal is to not make their lives harder.”
During the Appointments and Ordinances Committee’s discussion on the ordinance, members questioned where funds collected from registry fees and fines would go, and whether a revolving or restricted fund would need to be established. They voted to recommend that when the full City Council considers the ordinance on Wednesday, an amendment is made to clarify where collected funds will go and how they will be used.
The City Council is expected to discuss and potentially vote on the rental registry proposal during its meeting on Wednesday, July 15, at 6:30 p.m. at the John Zon Community Center.
