There has been much controversy over the proposed Licensing Program in Guelph. Many residents, tenants, landlords and property mangers have expressed their support and their concerns to the City over the last few months.
Below you will find a link to one of the letters sent to the Guelph Mayor and counsellors from two Guelph landlords outlining their concerns with the proposed licensing program.
Guelph Landlords’ Letter to Mayor – Dec 2013
Hello to all Guelph residents, and especially all parties concerned with the proposed Licensing Program for rental properties in Guelph. We attended the meeting held in the council chambers at City Hall on Tuesday night regarding this proposed licensing program in Guelph.
There was a large crowd in attendance in the gallery, comprised mostly of landlords and residents. It appeared that there was an overwhelming lack of support for the proposal from Guelph landlords and residents, so it will be interesting to see what happens at tonight’s second open house!
For those of you who did not attend Tuesday’s open house, below you will find some notes we made from the presentation by the City:
We encourage all interested parties to attend the meeting tonight (Thursday, November 21st) at 6:30pm at Guelph City Hall to give an opinion or just listen in. See you there!
Any stakeholders, which will include all taxpayers in Guelph, who will be affected by the proposed licensing of rental properties in Guelph should read this article from the LPMA News March 2013 edition, which is the newsletter for The London Property Management Association. The numbers are disturbing and clearly illustrate what many property owners in Guelph fear will happen in Guelph if the city passes the proposed licensing regulations as they have been presented.
We encourage all to pass along this article to members of City Council in the hopes that this will bring about more discussion before the licensing proposal is passed!
By clicking the link below, this will bring you to the LPMA News article discussing London’s financial challenges with the rental licensing program.
As you may be aware, the City of Guelph is considering implementing a Licensing Program. The City is currently trying to determine if this Licensing Program would help to increases the health, safety, and well-being of tenants while reducing disruptive behaviour and destabilization of neighborhoods with high concentrations of rental housing. On Monday, a report determining how this program could be financed was presented to the Planning, Building Engineering and Environment Committee.
This issue has brought up a lot of controversy in the community. On Monday, July 29, City Council is scheduled to discuss whether Guelph will be continue investigating further into this potential Licensing Program using input from the committee and feedback received from the community. If determined to proceed, the City will then reach out to tenants, landlords, property managers and other community members to discuss this program’s fees and regulations.
We can provide the benefit of 20 years’ experience in the management industry (for what it’s worth!) when looking at the issues described in the report released by the City, which favours Licensing of certain rental units. Because the City seems so heavily in favour of implementing this program, it’s almost impossible not to take the role of devil’s advocate in the hopes some more informed questions can be generated which may influence the council before this is put into effect.
To do this, let’s look at the different aspects and rationale the City is providing as reasons the Licensing Program is needed.
The issues identified that will be addressed are topped by the safety and well-being of tenants. Currently in place in Guelph, if tenants have a problem related to their safety and well-being of their property, they can call the fire department, the ESA, the TSSA, the Ministry of Housing, the City Bylaw Enforcement, Building Standards, the police, as well as file for a Hearing at the Landlord and Tenant Board for any issues related to their safety or enjoyment of their rental. Each of these organizations performs their function very well and enforcement of this Licensing Program would be a duplication of these services already being provided in an effective manner.
The report also states that the application of current enforcement methods is cumbersome and expensive. It’s difficult for me to understand how adding another layer of enforcement could reduce these costs or provide more effective enforcement to what is already in place. Plus, no details or numbers is provided to explain how this will be achieved.
The report suggests that the costs of this program will be borne by the types of rental properties being licensed. However these types of rental are a small segment of rental properties in the city, and this creates what amounts to an additional “tax” on owners of these types of rentals to pay for the duplication of many of these services the landlords are already receiving.
It has been reported by the Guelph Mercury that the number of behavioural complaints to the Bylaw Enforcement have decreased since last year. This seems to indicate the current enforcement methods are in fact effective. It was originally behavioural issues given as the reason for the need of this Licensing Program.
“A Licensing Program will address the safety and well-being of the tenants”, states the City’s proposal. No statistics have been provided to support that there is high number of incidents related to tenants’ health and safety in the types of rentals the City wishes to license. No details have been provided as to the nature of the health and safety issues that will be addressed by licensing. Currently, when an issue of safety or health does arise with a tenant, the tenant can not only report the issue to the landlord but also to the many organizations previously listed. It seems dubious that a new branch of enforcement would be able to improve upon these enforcement methods already available to tenants, neighbours and the entire community.
Costs of implementing this program are to be paid for by the landlords, but it is only a segment of landlords that is being asked to pay for these additional costs. This would appear to create an unfair advantage to owners of rentals with 3 or more units who will not have to be licensed under the current proposal. Should a business tax or fee that is applied not be able to be applied evenly to all business operations being operated in that segment? If it is not, perhaps that is an indication it is not a fair policy which will eventually be paid for by all taxpayers?
The City has provided costs related to the implementation of this program, yet there is no verification of the basic numbers the City has provided to establish what the costs will be. Approximately 8,700 rental units will be affected by this proposed Licensing Program, but we have no way to verify that 8,700 units is a reasonable number. How was this number determined? The city forecasts a compliance rate of 50% in year one and two and 66% by year three. What is the method in which this was determined? This compliance rate seems high, but how was this determined? Without verification of these broad numbers, it is unclear as to how accurate costs to landlords and taxpayers could be determined. It would be beneficial if the City could provide accurate details that will conclusively show this program will not run at a deficit for many years to come.
One detail in the report that most landlords would agree with is there will be an impact on affordable housing in Guelph. A simple fact of this business is, when you increase costs to landlords, rents go up and quality of rentals goes down. The money landlords must spend on compliance with this program cannot be spent on new flooring, new appliances, painting or other improvements most landlords routinely do. The $9 million the City forecasts will be collected will instead go to City to provide duplication of services they already offer, rather than be available to improve the quality of housing in Guelph for tenants. Plus, providing more affordable housing to students and families should be the goal of all levels of governing bodies and housing suppliers. This program seems contrary to this goal, and this is conceded in the report.
Let’s hope more taxpayers become aware of this issue and ask for more details and verification from the City before licensing is implemented, so that an extra burden is not placed on all residents by a new program that will run at a deficit for the foreseeable future.
There is an old saying that goes, “when something is done for the wrong reasons, it seldom turns out right”. Before implementing licensing for certain rentals, let’s make sure it is being done for the right reasons!
FOR RENT 