HomeMy WebLinkAbout14-City Administrator
CITY OF SAN BERN KDINO - REQUEST F R COUNCIL ACTION
Fro,m: SHAUNA CLARK
City Administrator
Subject: Rental Housing Inspection Program
Dept:
Date: 7/5/94
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
6/6/94
5/5/94
Public Hearing set for 7/5/94.
Heard by Legislative Review Committee
Recommended motion:
1. That Alternate No. be selected in order to implement the
Rental Housing Inspection Program.
2. That further reading of the ordinance be waived and it be laid
over for final adoption.
-##/EtllP$./Mi;/
, Signature
Contact person:
Shauna Clark
Phone:
5122
Supporting data attached:
yes
Ward:
FUNDING REOUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item NO.J.!:J
CITY OF SAN BERNI lDINO - REQUEST F( 1 COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
On June 6, 1994, the Rental Housing Inspection Program was
presented before the Mayor and Common Council at which time the
item was continued to the July 5th Council Meeting for a public
hearing. In addition, the Council asked the City Administrator's
Office to report on the successes of rental inspection programs of
other cities. Jeanne Fitzpatrick of my office has made contact
with representatives of the cities of Azusa, Santa Ana and Mesa,
Arizona with respect to their rental inspection related programs.
Attached for your review is an overview of the respective rental
programs and the effects of a rental inspection program as it
relates to the City of San Bernardino.
In addition, attached is the original Council Correspondence/Staff
Report presented at the June 6th Council Meeting which outlines the
proposed alternative plans; copies of the memos written to the
Mayor and Council and additional information received from the City
of Santa Ana with respect to their first targeted areas since the
implementation of their rental inspection program.
75-0264
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
. .
From: Shauna Clark, City Administrator Subject: Selection of funding mechanism
-- Rental Housing Inspection
Dt Administrative Program and set public hearing
for July 5, 1994 at 10:00 a.m.
Date: May 23, 1994
SynopSis of Previous Council action:
May 5, 1994 -- Heard by Legislative Review Committee.
Recommended motion:
That Alternative No. be selected in order to implement the
Rental Housing Inspection Program and that a public hearing be scheduled
for July 5, 1994, at 10:00 a.m.
~?Kb$AW
/' Signature
Contact person: Shauna Clark
Phone:
!i122
Supporting data attached:
Yes
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source: IAcct. No.)
IAcct. Descriotionl
Finance:
CO" 'I Notes:
,$
75.0262
Agenda Item No 1li /1
~II , U.. ~N tt~KNAHUINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
In 1990 the City established a single family rental business tax in
recognition. of the proliferation of housing in transition from
owner-occup1ed to rentals. This tax was imposed to fund code
enforcement as it was recognized that rental housing was placing
added demands on code enforcement.
To date, th~ Clerk's Office has identified over 5500 single family
rental un1ts. The net revenue from these collections is
approximately $240,000 per year. The general fund burden for code
enforcement is $397,700. ($539,700 less $142,000 paid by EDA).
Approximately 75t to 80t of code enforcement time is in response to
problems in rental units.
At the time the single family rental housing tax was imposed, no
specific inspection program was established. Code enforcement was
to operate on a complaint response basis. Growing demands have far
exceeded the staffing available. Code enforcement is unable at
this time to take a proactive stance. They are forced to operate in
a far less efficient reactive mode, addressing life safety issues
first leaving little time for other complaints. The intensive
paper work processing that goes along with code enforcement also
bogs them down.
Nor does the city have a funding source for inspection of multi-
family units. The Fire Department works on inspections when they
can, but again, their focus is on life safety issues.
Housing stock, especially in the city core where the highest number
of single family rental units is concentrated, has continued to
deteriorate and devalue. It is apparent that landlord. who are
deriving income from these units are not reinvesting their profits
(or tax savings) in their San Bernardino properties. Ba.ed on the
experience of other cities, we believe that a proactive roqram of
rental inspections, al~ with landlo~~'.' '. It~
proqr..., will reduc.__';._4J.~' .. ""<.'. ' . .
single family rentals w!~'Sftlrt back to owne -occup1ed which w111
stabilize neighborhoods and allow housing values to rise. Over
time, all property owners will benefit.
In order to generate funds for this program, three alternatives are
before you today for discussion.
Alternative I - Taraeted InSDections - Rental InSDection Surcharae
The first of the three the Mayor and Council may reco~ize a~ the
Santa Ana plan. The City of Santa Ana had a resident1al buslness
,tax similar to ours but added a surcharge to pay for e~anced
inspection programs. Because the Santa Ana surcharge d1d not
collect enough money to guarantee an inspection for every rental
unit, the inspections were targeted.
,';Y
75.026.
~
Rental Housing Inspection Program
Staff Report - Page 2
This alternative would allow the city to target rental housing
areas and do full inspections without regard to the license renewal
pattern. The surcharge money generated would be a tax, not a fee
and would not require direct correlation to the service being
provided.
By using existing data on crime patterns, code enforcement
complaints, density and other criteria, the Department of Planning
and Building Services would develop a strategic plan for targeting
the most critical problem areas. A team of inspectors would be
placed in the target area and would remain until all inspections
for the area were complete.
Alternative II - Annual InsDection CYcle - Pee for service
The second alternative is to charge a rental inspection fee (versus
a tax) for every unit at the time it is first licensed through the
Clerk I s Office and annually upon renewal. Once the fee is
collected by the Clerk's Office, the Department of Planning and
Building Services would have xx days to complete the inspection.
Although this program would generate enough money to inspect everY
unit once per year, the inspections would not be controlled by the
department on a strategic basis. Each inspection would occur
randomly, based upon business registration renewal cycle. and I
inspectors would be placed in a reactive, rather than proactive,
mode of operation. Fees would be based upon actual costs for
providing the inspection.
Alternative III - Two Year InsDection CYcle - Pee for .ervice
Alternative three is a variation of number two, but cuts
inspections in half, requiring inspections once every two years.
Fees would also be reduced.
SUDDortina document.
There are three supporting documents which expand on this program.
1. A chart from
Services which shows
alternative.
2. A chart which shows the rental inspection fee under each
alternative.
the Department of Planning and Building
the budgetary requirements for each
.;;
Rental Housinq Inspection Program
Staff Report - Paqe 3
3. An outline which gives a more in depth picture on how the
proqram would be structured.*
*Please note that Alternative No. 1 as outlined reduces the
business reqistration tax by 25% (from $60 to $45). I want to
emphasize, however, that I do not support a reduction in the tax
because the money will still be necessary for funding city
services, especially code enforcement.
~~~,A-Y>
City Administrator
,y
::E:
<
:::
<.:
~
-
Z
::l
'--
~ In
:,w.....
.::.. L1 en
:r. >.'-J
z...en
-O\lZ
COIl
I.:ICi:lo
Z X
-~"I
:tl >
~.= ~
'::O\lii!
-l~g
C~=
e-....i:lo
Z'"
0<
-
<
%
:.;
>
..c
:.J
'"
o
III
O..c
0....
InC
-0
o.
...
.
N
N
11
:II
0.::
0....
o =
. 0
- I!
N
...
rn
o..c
0....
o C
- 0
.... .
III
..,
...
III
Q/
>-
l.o
~ rn
i:lo....
....
~ C
~:l
....
0'"
Q/...
a. 0<
III
C....
"'0
Q/
ilia.
.... III
.... C
C...
:l
o
1:1'....
C
... ~
...~
...l.o
~...
:J ::l
O~
III
-%
..,
-' g
...
~
Q/
....
O\l
&
...
....
III
"1_
l.o
III 0
Q/....
~U
::l Q/
...a.
o III
C C
... ...
-
l.o
>-~
O\l e.
Q
III
l.o C
~ 0
e....
....
III 0
C Q/
o e.
.- tn
.... C
:J .-
:.l :.l
~.:::;
....
o
.(I
,...
,..
~
....
o
.(I
,...
l.o
Q/
a.
>-
....
...
...
...
.Q
O\l
e.
'"
u
c
o
...
....
o
~
e.
rn
=
...
IoONNpooj
.....,1......... _
..N........
...
l.o
o
....
U
Q/
a.
III
C
...
~
Q/
III
o
a.
o
l.o
i:lo
~1Il
~ l.o
~O
~....
Q/ 0
Z Q/ ~
a. ~
III III III
l.o C 0
0'" a.
.... ~O
o 1:1' Q/ ...
~CIIlClo
a.." 0
rn III a. III
C ::l 0 Q/
~ 0 LoI....
=c.1.I
I:" '"
- w :n oW
.- c.;,t. 11
:.,:.... - "-
:J "J
:,.. - :J
.... ...
.. .
.,
~
----~
:::.~~~~-
ONON
O~"'''''iol'l
O=r.n,.,,...,
.. ... .. ...
:.n:"r---\C=
-=,.,..
N I
I
- ~
-_N_
-~---
----..,
=:O::;l:= .:1
= r" ~ CD ....
:l .t'I 0 .r. ~1
... .. .. .. J
.r.OiJ"'lO"l=
....!'""I ~..., N
-..
<J'>
----
-~........
----
ONOIll
0ll'l.G\
o Or-"'"
Q'" f""" ,; ,.;
....call')N
...
.,.
-
...
-
----
CIOInION
ONODG\1n
.......nlt\...~
.... ... ... ... ...
1lI..,G\..,OD
tJ..~NN
.... (/) (/) (/) 00
"-4----
...
III
III
III
...
o
Q/ l.o
=0
....
l.o 0
o ~
:/Ie.
... III
> C l.o
l.o... 0
Q/ .......
a.1:I'0'"
~.: !.~.
r.o Ill'"
C ::l C Q/
00...... >-
... = U...
.... 1:1' III
(Jl.oC........
:J ':2:11Q/
=..... .'1'- W
'.1 :: _ '1.:':
= ,.,.:J
.: = =- :..~
~
C
=>
.-
....
N
N
..
....
..
<J>
=
,.,
.(I
=
....
....
<J'>
o
.
G\
-
10
o
..,
.,.
III
....
III
o
U
...
Q/
C
C
o
r.o
...
Q/
CIo
gooooooo~
ooooc
000ll'lll'l00
',Q" -.w'" ~... ~ I.t"l'" ~; ~~I
N --I
I
I
'h I
I
-
.(I
-
-
00000--'
000000:
~'~:'~~':~1
...... "-f'l""
<J'>
-.0
-
0000000
0000000
OOOOll'lOO
... OIl ... ... .. ..
..NOD..,ODO
...
.,.
III
II Q/ ~_
GI ...
1:1' .... "
... Q, :Il
III Q, III
~ tI1 =':'1 ..,
U IIlIlHIl..
Q/'" ..,
~ C".... ~.::
c: ... Co....::.. ~
.- ta Co':
... ... :I ... .;.J
~ ~ u ~, ;- =
;l = ~ I.. :
1:".... %:J:J:-'::
:<a,u ':""~:~
oW:> --...
:n .- :. - -
9:-" -"
---_.:.:..~
:;
::E:
o
o
o
.
o
,...
'J)
'"
..,
...
<J>
o
o
'"
c:>
..
<h
Ul
...
:Il
o
U
~,
00 0 0 .. ...to
00 0 0 '" :J-
00 .. ::> .......
. . . . . .
11\0 .., ."1 fill ...,'"
GI 0 ... t"'t ""10
.. . :...
<h <h c")o u> ,0
"'"'
..
-
000 0 1:1 =110
000 0 - .., IGIQ
00", "' ~ '" ~If"""
. . .
",0..- '" -4 ""'N
Ill... -&> ... NI.
.. .. ... "'IN
. , .
.. :..
<h <h c")o u> :0
-
-
0 0 0"''''
0 0 ""'III
.. 0 _III"
. .
",0 0 0 III .
>Q .. .., on 0
.. III
<h <h <h .. ..
-
-- I'
00 '"
00 .
C -OGl ...
0 tl' . ...
.. CO -
... .. ..
:oJ -"<h<h Q
S: u-- II:
III W
<IlN .. ;
C ...
- III Will
tl' ... >0
III ... III 1Il0U
C~ e ... =.:1
III
III I III C 0 8=
::I Co 0 U
0 III ... W
=.... 0 ... ... !i
III C III C
- >- - .... III
.,",: ....., .... El CI
... III El III Co OQ
C C III ... ... :=
111< ... III ::I III
::.: UI C a- u
III >- ... :.l to .
:J > tIl ..... > ua ~
.-.... ~I 'n .. W" 0;
.. <Il 0 :J g:Z
-... ...a ,
- ., :J 0..... ..,.~
...-~ a.c ::-::l
:.1 _ .:1 :: ., ., ;I' :;:;
-
~ - .::: -:
-' ,
::1 ..: ~ ,-
;..- ~ - ~ ~~ 1
.~. ....: -, :.-
SYSTE~ATIC RENTAL HOUSING INSPECT-'N PROGR&!
(Alternative Analysis)
Prograll aevenue
:"3X Aoor:lach
InSDttction
Fe. ADDroaC:h
12 . 24 Month ~vcle
$'~ - - .
<- ~er ~welllng Unit
$75 for 1st Dwelling ~nit
Plus ~20 for ea. Additional
Owell1.ng Unit
tJnit Tvne
Single-Family
Duplex
Triplex
Quad
5-Unit Complex
la-Unit Complex
20-Unit Complex
50-Unit Complex
S20
SolO
S60
$ao
$100
$200
$400
$1,000
p5
$95
$115
$135
$155
$255
$455
$1,055
Estimated Revenue
(Based on the aQove
fee structure)
$420,000
$1,400,000 annually for
12 IIOnth cycle
$700,000 annually for
24 aonth cycle
Additional aevenue
to be Identitied to
Support a Tenant/
Landlord Education
Program 1
Under a ree Approach,
a Tenant/Landlord
Educational Program
Could Not Be Funded
90.CI/'I~
TOTAL REVEW. REQUIRED
$510,000
5/4/94
.u.I.lIlDCET;M
TIt educational funds are not identified, the Tax Approach
would require a $24 per dwelling unit annual charge.
:~
P~~TAL HOUSING INSPECTION PR' ~
I. MISSION STATEMENT
systematically identify and corr t '
units which result in thr.ats toe~ cod. vlolations in rental
structural inteqri ty' and ne at' ccu~ant safety; threats to
n.iqhborhoods. Add1.tlonally :~r:. i.m~acts to surrounding
owners ~.~ enhancet1ieIr e.tt~c~ n Ol'lNtion to prop.rt~
~r~ ~tl:2ucatlonaL' effort. d.al~Rtr~x~rty managet
. re!~onibi,pll" t.n!~!- scneni~_J.Dll.tl.ct_ a. nt. -landlorlil
__U'-aVallabr. to .s.t'i't"-.m"" Q ocedures, and
....t:.ndard.prop.rt1.s.- litation of
II. SCOPE
The provisions of this program shall apply only t 'd'
rental property within 'tne desiqnat.d proactive rO ~esllhentlal
code enforceme~t areas. en a Ouslnq
III. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROGRAM
A.
Many landlords for both sinql.
propertles derive income from their
re~nvestinq sufficient mon.y for
malntenance.
and multi-family
properties without
ad.quate property
B. The majority of r.ntal properties in city have no on-site
manaqement. .
C. In many cases wh.re on-site _naqe..nt i. available
there is a lack ot Mowledqe, skill., re.ources and
di:ection trom the property owner to perfora needed
maJ.ntenance.
D. Th.re is a tendency for crim. -rate. to be highe.t in
areas wh.re properti.s are not owner occupied. It is
reasonable to .ake a conn.ction betwe.n lack ot prop.rty
maintenance, the d.t.rioration of the neiqhborhood, and
the crime within that neiqhborhood.
E. Absent.e prop.rty owners should b. held accountable for
maintenance and safety of their units and required to
h.lp mitiqat. the impacts q.nerated by t.nants.
F. In many cases throuqhout the City, rental property owners
may not be aware of proper procedures tor selecting
tenants, executinq rental aqree.ents.. ~h~ proper method
of evictinq tenants and other re.ponsJ.bJ.lJ.tie. related to
effective manaqement principle.. Th. lack of such
knowledqe has resulted in ineUecti,,:e managemen't
resultinq in a deterioration of many housJ.nq unlts.
;;
G.
A systematic inspection proqram wi)' provide r
rental, :operty owners with a basi, !or establ~:ponsible
condi~~on ot a housinq unit when dealinq with ten~~nq the
have ~ntent~o~ally damaqed a unit in order to avoid~:h:~~
respons~bllltles to the property owner.
IV. AUTHORITY
A.
B.
The State of California Health and Satety Code as well as
the Sta~e BUlldlnq Code grant to cities the authority to
perform ~esldentlal inspections.
The. State C.:nstitution permits each city to charg
i?us~ness . ':a:.< to all those doing business within :t:
Jurlsdlc-:.::::n.
V. FUNDING AND BCDGET :~PACT
A. 75\ of the complaints received by Code Enforcement are
related to rental properties. Adequate funding to
perform a proactlve, comprehensive residential rental
inspection program has not been set aside in the city's
budget and cannot be set aside without significant
reductions of funding for other programs.
1. Recognizing that some feel that the existing $60
tax is a hardship,-_ it is proposed that the business
registration minimum tax be lowered to $45 per
year.
2. Assess a $20 per-unit surcharge on the business
registration tax.
B. A reduction in the rental housinq business reqistration
fee from $60 to $45 will reduce qeneral fund. by $83,000.
The per-unit surcharqe will qenerate $416,000. All funds
from the surcharqe will be allocated to re.idential
rental code entorcement.
VI. ECONOMIC IMPACT ON RENTAL PROPERTY OWNERS
A.
B.
The net tax effect on owners of sin91e fUlily rentals
will be an increase of $5 per year.
Owners of apartment complexes will have an increase in
their taxes based upon the number of units within the
complex.
C.
In cases
the cost
of deficient properties,.landlor~s will incur
of corrections.
;"
Vll. BENEFITS TO PROPERT~ OWNERS
VIII.
D.
A.
C.
D.
A.
All OWl :s.of property within the ~_,y ot San Bernardino
wi~l benefl~ through aesthetic improvements made wit..
ne1ghborhoods. ,,In
Reduction of blight ,which should lead to increased
property ."alues.
B.
C.
Reduction of nega~ive impacts through improved management
of renta~s.
The cumu~a~ive =:enefits of the above should 1 d t
reduced =:- ::Je, stabU izati~n of property valu:: an~
improve~en~ :n the overall 1mage of San Bernardino.
MECHANICS CF ?ROGRAM
City Cle:-k's Office will collect fee.
B.
Funds will be used to create a housing inspection section
in the Department of Planni~g and Building Services.
Although inspections will be mandatory, the timetrame for
inspectlons will be adjustable.
To achieve optimum impact and to minimize tees charged to
property owners, inspections will take place in targeted
areas selected by the Mayor and Council on the basis of
need. Target area selection criteria may include:
1. appearance ot blight
2. crime levels
3. negative impact on surrounding area
4. high concentration of rental units
IX. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTtJRE
A.
This program will operate as a s.para~e subdivis~on.of
the Inspection Division of the Plann1ng and BU1ld7ng
Services Department. Housing inspection positions w1ll
be specifically created to carry out the program. These
positions will be distinct from the code enforce~nt ~nd
building inspection programs. A proposed orqan1zatlon
chart and initial budget are attached.
.;
x.
B.
This program will operate as a
Plannlr d B ' separate ."~~ivi.ion o.
' an Ullding Services. ~ ~
The hous l' nq l' ,
nspectlon' program will build
code enforcement processes, but will d'ft upo~ current
current code enforcement by h 1, ~r.ntlate from
en tore emp aSlzlng pr t'
emenc and focusing exclusiv 1 oac lve
e y on rental housing.
C.
ELEMENTS OF THE ::ISPECTION PROCESS
A. Pro-Acti~'e ?r~gra=
The program ~s ~~~ended to be pro-active At'
proce ' " '1 ;.. d 1 . sys ematlc
Ci ty ss _N_"~: -~. eve oPled tc? target specific areas of the
insp~cte-~' - ~:.l.'" h=enta unlts ha,ve been identified and
dd't' -: __..e ouslnq lnspectlon team will move to
a 1 lona. _araet areas. The Housing Ins t'
will noc respond to complaints in order to dPedc.: lOtn Sta~f
ff - ' e lca e thelr
eo' C?rts -~tlnle systematlc program. The Code Entorcement
lV1Slon ~l contlnue to respond to all complaints.
B. Inspecti:::n Cycle
Based on the proposed staffing, it is anticipated that
8,000 to 10,000 units can be inspected annually. With
the 20,000 rental units now registered and others
ex{)ected to be, identified, it is anticipated that all
unlts can be lnspected within a 36 to, 48 month time
frame.
C. Cooperative Program with Responsible Property owners
Every attempt will be made to develop a positive
relationship with property owners. The initial steps ot
the proqram will be to schedule joint inspection visits
with thll proPf'rty owner or property UJUlger. Where
detects are tound, a deticiency notice will be given to
the owner with a reasonable time trame tor correction.
The time trame will vary according to the seriousness of
the deUciency. A reinspect ion meeting will be scheduled
with the owner. It corrections have been completed, an
inspection certiticate shall be issued.
In the event significant progre.s on corrections has not
been accomplished, the owner or property manager will be
issued a formal Correction Notice with a second time
frame identified for the repairs to be coapleted.
Failure to comply with the correction Notice will :es~lt
in an enforcement action through the Board ot BUlldlnq
Commissioners. The procedure at this point will be the
same as for other Code Enforcement violations.
f
D. Inspection Standards
The City has property maintenance standards. These
standards deal with ~he required maintenance o't the
exterior of the structure such as paint, landscaping, and
the removal of junk and debris. The City has also
adopted t:Je Housing Code. The purpose of this code is to
provide ~:nimum standards to sateguard lite and limb,
health, ~r=perty. and pUblic weltare by regulating and
controll ::-.g t.he use and occupancy. location and
maintenance of a1" residential buildings and structures
within ':~:3 Jur:s.:l1ction. These are the two basic
ordinances as ~ar': of the program.
E. Educaticn?r:lgram
Develop and i:!lplement an education program to assist
landlords ''; 1 th <::enant screening and other aspects of
owning and operating rental units.
I
l
.
..
!. .
I " ~
en
....
. ... .-HH -
U ... Uf"'IH...
li! ; ... ;-......
0 ... ~ ...........
.. .... "~........
i:i ~ a.........
.USU""
0 '8'" ...
.. " 'WU........,
0 U... \101111.
0 . 0.0........
" '8 ~ ~ tt
"
-..
N- N
-
.
. .. ~
.. 0
0.. ~
"'U 0
8o!. "'-
z U...
~ 0 ..-
~ .~ 0..
'" ~ e.... ~~N
~ .. .... . e~-
> '" ~I ~i"" "'0
~ ~ e .,~
0 e ~ .... 0 "'U~
~ .~ e ..
z u :!l...~ ., ~ 0.....
. I~ 0 .. u ~ ~ ~
. ... e '" ..." .. o e ..
U E- o ."'0 '" 0......
... u .~ '" u
G OJ ., e ... '"
I B 0. U ..; ...... e ~e"
'" .. '" 0.... .~ 0.... II)
1II i en z c.. ... .... ..... ~ .... 01....
... ~ .~ 5& ... 0 coo..
~ e , 0 "0>0
e ... '" en l: '" "''''E-
...
;!l ..
0
... ..
i U -
. N
.. -
i ...
" 'lJ .
..
.. tJ ~
~ 3
.~
g . ! 6
... ....
. .... e .
... .= w . !
. !l .
.. i !
.... !. .
0 ....,
en' " a
.. E! en en
11 . I ..-
U 0: e .... ... wp.:::
. ~I 0 .... ~ ..
.~ ... . g .H~
.. ... 6 U
" .. w ! ...
~ .. i ... · i ,.u,
~ ... i .....aw
...
~ ... "})OO
.. . ! ....
. g J
; j . ..
U ..............
~ H ~~
~-
--
"''''
--
. .
.. ....
.. ..
~ e ~u:::
c
"
.... g........w
'" ".w
.... .... ",,,..4 i y
" D.~!U
0.. ,
..; ..... ..
u og...
e
..; i.~~U
~
'" en'='= en
.
RENTAL INSPECTION ANALYSIS
I. OVERVIEW OF REPORTED SUCCESSES WITH RESPECT TO RENTAL
INSPEC'I'ION RELATED PROGRAMS.
The cities of Azusa, Santa Ana and Mesa, Arizona all have
implemented programs relating to the inspection of rental
properties. Each of the respective programs have been
operating for at least a one year period; the exception being
the City of Azusa which implemented their program in 1990.
All three cities have reported nothing but absolute success as
a result of implementation of rental inspection related
programs. These successes include the reduction of crime and
crime related calls, reduction in fire and code enforcement
calls and the increase in property appearance, resulting in
increased property values.
A. Affects of Rental Programs on Crime and Code Enforcement
Related Calls:
Prior to the implementation of the rental program, Azusa
found that there was a direct correlation between
degenerated housing and increasing crime. It was
revealed that virtually all drug related activity was
associated with rental properties, as were assaults with
a deadly weapon, battery, spousal abuse and disturbing
the peace. Upon implementation in 1990, they registered
their rental units to be approximately 56% of the city's
permanent housing stock. Azusa studied the crime rate in
specific areas involving high rental occupancy. since
the implementation of the program, Azusa has realized a
46% reduction in crime overall in these specific areas
including: 58% reduction in auto theft, 65% reduction in
drug activity, 40% reduction in battery, 26% reduction in
burglary and 42% reduction in vandalism.
Since the beginning of operation of Santa Ana's Proactive
Rental Enforcement Program (PREP) in 1993, the city has
completed the inspection of residential rental properties
in two designated inspection areas, and is currently in
the initial stages of inspections in a third area. The
inspection of the first PREP area included the inspection
of 123 rental properties containing 1,100 units. As a
result of this proactive effort, the City of Santa Ana
has realized a 26% decrease in police activity and a 15%
decrease in fire related incidents.
Mesa's program involves a three level process educational
program designed to comprehensively train property
managers and tenants on issues of property maintenance,
tenant eviction processes, security requirements and
crime prevention. The decision to implement this program
was made upon the determination by the Police Department
that the city's crime rates had increased in areas housed
with deteriorating rental properties. As a result of the
implementation of their crime Free MUlti-Housing program
implemented in 1993, the City of Mesa has realized a 67%
reduction in crime related calls among rental property
areas.
B. property Improvements of Rental properties and Effects on
Property Values:
All three cities have realized a significant increase in
property improvements, resulting in increased property
values. In addition, these improvements have resulted in
an increase in tenant occupancy as well.
During the first year of Azusa's program, property owners
made approximately $2 millon worth of improvements to
their buildings and landscaping. In the second year,
approximately $1 millon more in improvements were made.
Subsequent years have resulted in ongoing efforts to keep
the rental properties up with previous improvements.
with respect to resale values, Azusa staff found that
those properties selling for less than $125,000 were more
likely to become investor rentals, while those over
tended to be owner occupied. This finding was most
evident in an area housed with condominiums surrounding
a golf course wherein the condominiums sold for less than
$60,000 in the 1980's and had a 70% rental rate. Today,
these same condominiums sell in the area of $100,000 and
have a rental rate of approximately 40%.
The inspection program of the City of Santa Ana resulted
in many property improvements. Inspections of the first
PREP designated area revealed 2,239 violations including
the following: 1,160 immediate life-hazard situations,
782 non-threatening conditions, 172 primarily cosmetic
conditions and 125 tenant caused violations. Letters were
sent to the respective property owners, all of whom
eventually complied with no referrals of court action.
Overall, the PREP program resulted in upgrades by the
property owners in excess of $750,000 within the first
phase.
The Crime Free Multi-Housing Program of the City of Mesa,
Arizona has resulted in improvements made to rental
properties ranging from implementation of security
hardware (i.e. deadbolts, window locks, etc.) to complete
facelifts and renovations of older properties. Many
property owners have voluntarily spent thousands of
dollars to refurbish and refresh the appearance of their
properties to qualify as members of this program.
II. OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM DESIGN AND THE UNIQUE ASPECTS OF EACH
APPROACH.
Overall, each of the respective city programs offered positive
change, yet the designs of the programs offered a uniqueness.
The one common aspect among all three was the fact that each
program took an extremely proactive approach in order to
accomplish their goal of reducing the threat of occupant
safety whether it be as a result of structural integrity or
crime related activity.
A. Azusa's Program:
The City of Azusa implemented a program whereby each
property is inspected once per year, which could occur
anytime after registration, but generally within six
months. The inspection involves the exterior condition
only, unless there is evidence that a maj or problem
exists within the unit. The inspector will then attempt
to contact the resident living at the location to explain
the purpose of the inspection, and further question the
tenant with respect to any problems existing in the unit
that are not being addressed by the management. The
method of surveying the tenants about the interior
condition of the unit has had a direct positive impact on
the property owners. In some cases, the city of Azusa
has gone to court on the property owner's behalf whereby
the owner has bega.n eviction proceedings against the
tenant as a result of poor tenant upkeep. The City has
brought evidence forth from the tenant survey stating
that the City of Azusa visited the tenant on X date at
which time the tenant stated that no problems existed
within the unit.
Azusa's program takes a very proactive "neighborhood"
approach whereby they work directly with the property
owners and tenants in order to help best meet their
needs, resulting in the goal of property improvement.
One of the unique ideas of their programs involves
offering improvement loans. The property owner is
offered a loan for improvements, utilizing a contractor
designated by the City of Azusa. In turn, the owner
makes payments on the loan while a lien remains recorded
on the property until full payment is received. Should
the property owner default on the loan, the city will
immediately place the balance of the loan as a special
assessment on the property tax bill.
B. Santa Ana's program:
The City of Santa Ana utilizes a targeted approach
whereby the area chosen for inspection is based upon
analysis involving specified criteria such as: history of
violations, physical deterioration, criminal activity,
tenant complaints, pOlice/fire responses, etc. Under this
approach, every rental owner pays an annual inspection
fee: however, all units are not inspected on an annual
basis as a result of the targeted area approach.
In order to reward owners of rental properties that are
maintained well, the City of Santa Ana is in the process
of developing an incentive program. In order to become
eligible for the incentive program (incentive
undetermined at this time) there is a set of criteria
which must be met. The City of Santa Ana has a Housing
Task Force Committee that is directly involved with the
implementation of this incentive program and was also
involved with the original implementation of the rental
inspection program as well.
c. Mesa, Arizona's Program:
The design of Mesa's program is a unique solution in that
it involves a certified training and educational program.
The program invol ves a three level process whereby
property owners and tenants are trained in areas relating
to the owning/renting of rental properties. In order to
graduate to a higher level of the program (i. e. level two
or three), all managers must be certified at the lower
levels first.
Level one consists of property manager training where
topics include creating, explaining and enforcing rental
agreements: identifying illegal activity, and working
with the police. Special emphasis is also given to
training managers on the applicant screening and eviction
processes. In addition, managers are explained of the
drug-free lease addendum which is to be signed by
tenants, agreeing that they will not engage in any type
of criminal activity. Prior to advancing to the second
level of training, property manager must also agree to an
inspection of their property.
Level two consists of crime prevention through
environmental design. During this phase, property
managers gain the knowledge they need to protect their
properties against crime which include natural
surveillance, access control, territoriality and activity
reports. When the property manager believes that their
property meets the requirements of the second phase, a
crime prevention specialist conducts an on-site
inspection of the area.
Level three consists of training for residents. In this
session, police crime prevention specialists address
several topics such as an explanation of the drug free
lease addendum as it pertains to the crime-free
commitment as well as general safety and crime prevention
III.
techniques for automobile theft, sexual assault and
burglary. This level is designed to train tenants to be
the eyes and ears of the apartment community.
Through this three level program, the city of Mesa has
realized that crime can be curtailed in targeted areas
when residents accept responsibility for their own
environment. Mesa's program demonstrates that even
renters can feel pride in ownership towards their
communities.
THE RENTAL HOUSING PROGRAM AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO.
Last month, Monev Maaazine named San Bernardino as the
sixth most dangerous city in the united states, clearly
illustrating that San Bernardino suffers from a serious
crime problem. Recently an analysis of the crime within
the city was plotted on a map in order to determine the
highest concentrations of crime areas. Upon analysis, it
was determined that the highest concentration of crime
lies within the area bounded by the 215 freeway on the
west, Highland Avenue on the north, Waterman Avenue on
the east and 9th Street on the south.
A second map of information was also plotted, this being
the concentration of rental properties within the City of
San Bernardino. Upon analyzing this map, it was
determined that the area illustrating the highest
concentration of crime was also housed with a high
concentration of rental properties. Debra Daniel, Code
Compliance Supervisor was asked to arrange video taping
of this area in order to illustrate the deteriorating
condition of rental properties within this area and the
fact that a large number of rental properties are in
violation of various health and safety codes which should
be addressed immediately.
As with the cities of Azusa, Santa Ana and Mesa, Arizona,
it was determined that the crime within the City of San
Bernardino is also directly correlated to the high
percentage of deteriorating rental properties within the
surrounding areas. The solution, as with the
determination of the cities interviewed, is to implement
a proactive inspection program. The current system of
code compliance encompasses 50 square miles of area. On
an average, the Code Compliance Division receives between
80 and 90 code complaints per day of which approximately
75% are in response to rental problems. Unfortunately,
because of the size of the city and the lack of staffing,
the officers must operate on a complaint response basis
only, resulting in a no win situation for the entire
community.
IV. RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM PROPOSED FOR THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO.
The City of San Bernardino is proposing three alternative
rental housing programs which were presented before the Mayor
and Council on June 6th. Each of these proposed programs is
very similar to the program designs of Azusa, Santa Ana and
Mesa, Arizona. Because of the successes documented with
respect to the individual programs of these cities, it is
anticipated that the City of San Bernardino will also reap
similar benefits.
The crime and rental statistics of the city clearly indicate
that high concentrations of poorly maintained rental
properties coincide with higher concentrations of crime. In
consideration of the city's resource limitations to address
the problem through traditional code and law enforcement
channels, it is apparent that a proactive approach is best
suited in order to avoid a situation that may ultimately prove
unmanageable.
It must be considered that San Bernardino does maintain a
level of populous considered to be in the lower income
category. Such residents, through financial limitations, are
most often required to rent housing. It is these same
citizens who will continue to be subjected to decreasing
standards of living within the future.
Considering that housing within the city remains in the
"affordable" range for investors, and that renters remain
abundant, purchasers of rental properties will undoubtedly
continue to be attracted to the area in the coming years.
These individuals should be provided with adequate
programs/training that will ensure their investment while
ultimately providing for a safer and more protected community
for lower income residents.
The implementation of programs that clean-up target areas
while reestablishing safer neighborhoods will serve to
positively impact existing, negative influences while
generally lending a proactive image to the city at large. A
community of better maintained homes and apartments has proven
to benefit all parties involved - property owners and their
respective property values, renters and their personal living
standards, as well as other city residents (owner-occupied
properties) and businesses who maintain concerns about
increasing crime and declining community identity and
direction.
MEMO TO COUNCrr..
AZUSA RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
CITY ADMINISTMTOR'S OFFICE
TO:
Honorable Mayor and Common Council /
FROM: Jeanne Fitzpatrick. Administrative AnalY~
DATE: June 10, 1994
;UBJECT: Rental Housing Inspection Program
COPIES: Shauna Clark. City Administrator; Dan Robbins, Police Chief; Al Boughey,
Planmng and BUlldmg Director; Rachel Clark, City Clerk; David Schultz, San
Bernardino Board ,f Realtors; Richard Kimball and Richard Brooks, Sun
Newspaper
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 6, 1994, the Rental Housing Inspection Program was presented before the Mavor and
Common Council at which time the item was continued to the July 5th Council Ml:eting for
Public Hearing. In addition, the City Administrator was asked to report on the successes of
Rental Inspection Programs of other ties with respect to the reduction of blight and crime, and
the increase in property values. I am in the process of researching the success rates of various
programs; however, in the meantime, I would like to provide you with a draft report prepared
by the Community Improvement Manager of the city of Azusa.
Prior to the implementation of the program, the city of Azusa found a direct correlation between
degenerated housing and increasing crime. Upon implementation of their program in 1990, the
city of Azusa registered their rental units to be approximately 56% of the city's permanent
housing stock. In 1994, the city of Azusa studied the crime rate in a specific area involving
high rental occupancy. Since the implementation of the Rental Inspection Program, Azusa has
realized a 46 % reduction in crime in that specified area. Additionally, Azusa continues to track
the results of their Rental Inspection Program with respect to property values, business attraction
and school drop out rates.
Each city surveyed to date has implemented similar Rental Inspection Programs, yet unique to
their city. Although each program is distinct, every city repre~ntati,ve shares the, sa",le view
in that the implementation of their respective program has had a direct Impact onthelr come and
blight statistics, resulting in positive change.
Any additional information/documentation received with respect to Rental Inspection will be
forwarded to your attention.
/
..WfAL z...ICfZOK .ao~1AX
(Synop.i.)
Th. Rental In.pection r.oqram i. ooditied under Chapt.r 15.40
Alu.a Municipal Code which ceoame operative in F.bruary,
19.9. The ordinanc. was adopted in response to council and
public concerns oyer ~.t.rioratinq housin9 condition. which
w.re attributad to soaentea rental property ownere. In 1988/
complaint. conc.rnini rentol hou.ing aooounted or
approximat.ly 90' ot 011 complaint. handled by code
.nto~cemant. Th. ordinanc. cam. out ot a work. hop ....ion
with the Clty Council alonq with a prop.rty maintenance
o~dinanca which wa. coditied under Chapt.r '.!l AZU.A
Municipal Coda which attempt.d to create objective standard.
tor prop.rty maintenance.
Prior to adoption ot the Rental In.p.ction ordinanc., the
city conduct.d a workshop wharein all rantal property owners
ware invitad to give their input on the propo..d ordinance.
At the time ot the workshop virtually all owner. in
att.ndanc., along with the Los Anqales I pa.adena Apartment
Owner'. A..ociation., aireed that .omethinv had to be done to
curb the deiradation ot housing since it wa. impaoting both
proparty v.lu.. and the d..ir. at vood t.nant. to r.nt in
Azu.a. A. ar.a. with high rental rate. devenerated we al.o
.aw incr.a.1ni crime, grattiti, and the movem.nt at lonv term
re.ident. out ot the city. With lower properey value. in
many araa. we alao saw home. which had praviou.ly been owne~
occupied become rantals due to tha lowar valua.. Th. meeting
with the own.r. also detailad what the program wou14 ba
tarietini includinq paint, landecaping, rooting, retu.a
s~orai., illegal housing, and substandard housing condition..
upon the ordinance becoming etteotive the city be,an the
regi.tration proce.~. Almoet 5 months later in July, 1989
the tir.t In.p.c~or. were hired to beiin the inepection
proo....
In the tlr.t yaar ot the Rental In.pection Program rantal
property owner. ~ade approximataly 2 million dollar. worth ot
improvem.nta to their buildings an~ land8capinv. In the
.acond year we saw approximately 1 million dollar. mora in
im rovementa, lubsequent years have re.ulted in on90in9
matntenanca ettortl to keep the rental propartie.. up with
previous improvament..
In 1110 the city reqietered approximately 6.800 rental unite
o~t ot the approximately 12,000 reeidential unite within the
city (exclude. 52! mo~il'home'l whioh repre.ented
approximately 56' or the city'. permanent ho~.inq .took. In
1.1. the city contain. 6,006 reqi.tered rental ~nit. out ot
approximately 12.050 residential unita or approximately 50'
or tne city" per~anen~ ~ou.inq .tocx. Thi. reduction i.
attributed to .eve.ral ~actor., includinq down zoninq ot hiqh
den.ity area., .inq:e-fam11y home infill project. where
.ub.tandard rentals were demoli.hed, conatruction of the
Lewi. Kome. project at C1tru. and Foothill, the demolition ot
the 106 unit Balboa Apartment complex, and a reduction in the
number ot ov.rall ~.ntal f condominium. and .inqle family
home. due to hi9her rosa.. value. and market torce.. With
re.pect to re.ale values, start tound that tho.e propertie.
.e11inq tor le.. than $125,000 were more likely to become
inveetor rentals. while tho.e over tended to be owner
occupied. Thi. phenomena i. mo.t evident in the condominiums
.urroundinq the golf cour.. area whioh eold in tne 1980'. tor
lee. than '60,000 and had a 70' rental rate. Today'th.e.
aame unit. .ell in the ~rea ot $100,000 and nave a rental
rate ot approximately 40t.
A. part ot the Rental Inapection proqram .tatt continue. to
.xamine trend. in Azusa's housinq stock, a. well a. examine
problem areas which are i~entitia~ in the cour.. ot .akinq
the in.pections and talkinq with tenant.. otten probl.m
t.nant. are brouqht to the attention ot property owner. as
the .ource ot increa.e~ police activity on their properties
in which the owner 1. encouraqe~ to evict problem ten.nt..
Thi. va. mo.t evi~.nt in the "Mountain View Apartment." at
Citru. an~ ArrOW Kwy. in 1990 wherein an enolave ot
approximataly 30 Crip. 9an9 .ember. ha~ moved into the
complex. The net re.ult wa. a dramatic increaae ot police
activity which included outside law antorcement aqencies
mak1nq rout in. .earch warrant inspection. an~ ~ruq arre.ts at
the location. Atter conductinq inspections ot tne property
statt or~ered approximately 40 apartments ou~ ot 125 to b.
vacat.d an~ rehabilitated. Prior to thi. action Alu.a polica
received approximately 5 call. per day to the oomplex. At~.r
the entorce.ent action calls to the property ware reduced to
approxi~.'telY 7 per week. A. units became reocouplad .tatt
continua~ to monitor conditions which have remaine~
relatively .teady.
:n the Saloboa Apartment. ca.a at 600 N. Cerrito. Avan~~~
statt recantly comp.re~ crime statistiC. ba.e~ on the ye
ot 1991-92 (betore entorcement action) an~ 1993-94 (attar
de.olition). Thi. analysis reveal.d ~he tollowin; crim.
re4uoUon in whee :.. Known .. "AIU" poace Report in;
D1e~r1ot 323" which i. l:Io~ncie4 by Foothill Blvd. on the
Nor~h, Cerrito. Ave. on ~h. w..t ~ockval. AV.. on ~h. Ea..,
and Fifth Street on the So~thl ' v
Auto Theft
D&'\I' AoUvity
I.U.ry
lul"1 ary
vandaU..
-sn
-6!"
-40_
-:aU
-4:n
In .hort, a .tronq enforcem.n~ pr09r.. doe. in tact have
.p1n-ott b.n.tits in ~h. area ot crime reduction, a. w.ll a.
improving and maintAi.ning the exi.ting ho~.in9 .tock.
operationally, the Rental In.pection proqram i. .et-up to
in.pect reqi.tered rental property once per y.ar, which co~ld
occur anytim. atter registration. Typically, however, once a
property i. reqi.tered a. a rental the prop.rty will be
inapecteci within eix montha. Thi. inspection involve. an
on.ite vi.it to the property wh.rein in.pector. look tir.t to
;.neral appearance and whether or not any nmaintenanc.
violation." are visible. Th. in.pector will then atte.pt to
contact resid.nts livin; at the location to .xplain the
purpo.e ot the insp.ction, anci to a.k it tne t.nant ha. any
problema with the unit which ar. not bein; addr....d by ~he
owner or manag.ment. Thi. interview with tne tenant will
;enera11Y a.k it th.re ar. any root leak., proper oomtort
he.tint, v.rmin inte.tation, a workin; emok. deteo~or, proper
pluab1nt, or any other condition. Becau.e ot o.ee law in
CUrrier ~ ~ 2f pa.aciena an interior in.pection will only
bt made it the tenant request. it and 8i9n. a con.ent form.
In oaee. where there i. evidence that a major problem may
exiat 1n.ide a unit and the tenant will not five con.ent, a
co~r~ order.d In.pection warrant i. obtained. Where tenant.
are not contacted durini a routine in.pection, In.pector. are
typically leavinq a note that an ettort to contact the tenant
was macie, or a letter i8 sent to the tenant. explaininq that
they may contact u. with any problem they may have with th.ir
hou.1nq. It ~e~..ted by a tenant, a .econd vi.it to the
p~operty will be made without additional charie.
When violatione are tound, or a complaint i. received and
verified bY in.pec'tion. the owner i. ..IIt a IIlleque.t tor
Compliance". Unle.. the viola~ion +s very hazardou., tne
owntt will be .aXed to correct the Vlolation within 30 days
a. required ~nder state law. Xf the own.r .ub..quently
contacta u. re9ar~in9 the violation or the amount of time
allocated to oomply, and ha. .om. diffioulty in meetint the
ei.e fra.., o~ hee a tinancial diffioulty, we will .xtend the
ti.. it a 9004 faith affor~ to oomply ia demonatrlted. When
the allocated or axt.ndad time haa lap.ed, a .econd
inapection i. ma4e to varify complianca. If oorrectione have
been completed the case i. th.n cloee4. If the viol.tion.
remain, .nforc.ment action. are then initiated and .11
.nforce.ent coet. are chargod to the property owner.
The proqram utilizes an A4mini.trative Hearinq procedure
which i. intormal, !air, and efficient, and avoid. .any of
the c.... havinq to ba heard by the City Councilor in
court. z..entially, eni. procea. allow. for a neutr.i third
party to liaten to and .e. all r.levant evid.nce concern in, a
violation. our process c~rrently utilize. a r.tired Azusa
police captain who ia under contract to provide ..rvice. ..
an Adminiatrative Hearing Officer. Hi. only 1n.truction. are
to be impartial and independent in reachin, a deci.ion .fter
li.teninq to both the City's atatf and the atfected property.
owner. Thi. process i. much more expedi.nt and cost
eff.ctive than the crimin.l pro.ecut10n ot violation. .ince
the entire proce.. c.n be noticed and concluded within ten
(10) day.. The pro.ecution proce.. r.quir.a a lar,e .xpenee
for attorney'. fees and can take a. lonq a. a year to r.aolve
1n the court. Over the 1993-94 ri.eal Year .taff conduoted
approximately 160 Public ~ui.ance K.arinq. involving rental
propereie., of the.e only one appeal wa. made to the city
council which denied the appellante app.al and axten4.d the
eoapllance tlme for two (2) year..
An analy.i. of AZU.. rental hou.inq reveal' that the bulk of
all rental hou.lnq wa. conatructed in 1964. A. .uch, mo.t of
the unit. were built with inadequate off-atreet parkin"
carport. rath.r than . qaraqe., no built-in appliance.
(di.hwa.h.r., ov.ns, or stovea), and were .quipped with wall
heater. rather than central air condltion1nq. A. .uch the..
aame unite are now lea. desireable to .ore affluent tenants
who pref.r a aore up-.eale apartment with all the a.eniti..
on. would typically find in a modern home.
our obaervatione are that thi. .,in9 of the hou81n, atook ha.
reeulted in the attraction of a larq.ly lower inoome ten.~t
population with leS8 dispo.able income .implYgdbecau.ei t ~
unit. com=and les. rent when compared to :o~~ · v!;~il~yP~~d
hou.inq unit.. This has in tuirn decreha.: d:a1in, in home
demand tor more local reea 1 mere an ·
tu~nllhlnil, and mora up-scale're.taurant., while at the .am.
ti.. inc~..ling d.mand tor mora low.r-.nd merch.ndilinq in
the tora ot .wap m..t., ..oond hand .tor.., ta.t food
re.t.ur.nt., and u..d car d.al.r..
tn the are. of police .ervio.., .taft tound that .1' of all
.it. .pecific pol1oe oall. were to rental propartie. 11'
we~. to .1n91e f.m11y owner oooupi.d hou.inv, and )., we~. to
comm.rci.l properties (ea.ed Oft a on. y.ar review). A
br.akdown ot the.e calls turther rev.aled that virtually all
drug ~.lat.d activity was allociated with r.ntal properties
a. ~.:e ....ult. with a deadly w.apon, battery, .pouaal
abuI., and di.turoinq the peac.. On the owner occupied eid.
.tatt tound that pOlice calli to the.e location. wer.
predominantly victim. ot property crime includin9 burglary,
vand.lilm, and thett. The commercial call. r.vealed th.ir
u.. of police .ervic.. were larqely tor th.ft, bur9lary, and
.il.nt alara r..pon....
W. believe that the larq. quantity ot r.ntal hou.in9 ha. a1.0
impact.d the Azuaa Uniti.d School Di.trict in .ev.ral way..
The.. impact. are 1arqely r.lated to the tran.i.nt popUlation
a..ociated with rental hou.inq, and the low.r income .t.tUI
a..ociated with this population. Thi. was perhape mo.t
evident in lj86 wh.n Azu.a High School had the dubious
di.tinction ot havinq the ..cond high..t drop-out rate of any
hiih .chool in Los Anq.le. County (S3.5'). What in fact the
D1.t~lct tound wa. that the large numbe~ ot tran.ient t.nants
who moved 1n and out ot the Di.trict oreated thil anomaly.
Up unt1l lj88 the District counted a withdrawal froa the
.chool a. a drop-out and did not attempt to d.te~in. What
h.ppened to the student. Today the District will not oount
the .tud.nt a. a drop-out it a transcript is requ.sted within
one year. It wa. the District'. ~eliet that if e t~an.cript
wa. requested that the student .imply moved into another
district. While this 1arg. movement ot .tudent. continue. on
a yearly ba.i. the drop-out rat. baaed on tran.cript requast.
ha. been raduced tc 6..' in 1993, which is now the third
lowest in Lo. Angele. County.
The impact ot this larie transient school population on the
character and quality ot the .chool .y.tem i. ditticult to
quantity. Inherently, sine. thie population i. largelY
a..ociated with a lower incom. transient populatio~ it ia
po..ible that tho les. staele student population adver.sly
aft.ct. the learninq environment since a majority otit~~e
Itudentl naver ..taolish root. in the community, or w n
the Ichool 'Yleam.
While ~be aen~al In.p.c~ion P~09~a. wa. no~ in~en4e4 ~o be a
.~u4~ of the .ooial and 4e~c9raphio impact. on ~he oo__unity,
the.e i..u.. keep ari.inq in our analy.i. ot how . oo..uni~y
can ea.l1y .utter aa a r..ult of a h19h ~ran.ient pcpulation.
It 1. ev1~ent throu9h our In.pection. that a gr.at ~eal ot
4a.age i. cau.ed in rental properties by the tenant.
them.elvea. Th1. 1. typically in the torm ot qrattitl, broken
win4ows, ~ole. 1n interior walls, unpermitted .tora;e ot
di.mantled veh1cle:!, removal ot smoke lSetector., the
appearance of caat-ott ~t:lplianC:~!l / tllrnh:llra, and the
tbrowing of tra.h and ~ebri. around many of the rental
properti...
Wh1le moat rental property owners are aware that .ome of
their tenant. are responsible tor damaie. and the dimunition
of .urroundini property value. in .ome neiihborhood., mo.t
are reluctant to entorce rental aqraement.. Th1. reluctance
i. mo.t evident when an absentee owner has ditficulty ren~lni
the unit., or when in spit. of beini e balS tenant, ~he ~enant
pay. hi. rent. When ab.entee owner. are contronted wlth
deterioratini property condition. they will more otten than
not at~ribu~e the problem. to ~heir tenant. and add a
qualifying statement .uch u "This .. the way these p.ople
livel",
.
(
RESIDENTIAL RENTAL INSPECTION
18.31.0:20 tlSE OF ~OIILE HO~ltS FOR CO~~IERCI"L.
ETC.. PUIPOSES. Th. .a. ot llIobil. 110m... tran.n or eoaell..
tor ome., commorcial or manllractllrln, ,lU'pOIIllkall b. lImit.eI
III lamporary 11M llnl>' tor a porloel or time 1I0t 10 .xeltel lix
monlk..
Application tor t.mporary II" permlu .hal1 be maclt 10 tll.
Plannln, Dlroc\Or. HI .h111111111 thl permit it hi nncll that thl
pro,o..eI UII cam,lI.1 with all applleull IOlIln, orellnanell ill'
eluelln, IItback roquir.mlntl. parkin, roqlllr.mento .nel .ip
roquinmlntl. Thl "rmh lhall nDC luthorl.. any IIdlity hook.
uJll. IXC"1 t.mpor.,.,. IIllphon. or .Ioctrlcal IIrvle. mly be
prClvlcltel by mlllll ot I tompo,..", power polo.
All additional 11m. porIocIlII&,)' '" audlCll'l1IcI 11\8r I public
haarinl ill lIeh ca.. IIIIcIor I Conditional UII Plrmlt in leeorc!.
anca with proctdur.. ."ted In CUpt., 11.10. COrel. t 09 t , 1.
I1T4; Ord. 1011 , 2 lp&l'\l, Iln: prior code IISOII.
ella,.., 1.,010
UIIDDrl'lAL u.vrAL INSPECTION
(
Ieodon'l
11.060.010
lUO.0I0
lUO.030
15.40.040
15.~0.050
11.40.010
lUO.OII
~lI.40,0'0
15040,010
15.40.090
15."o.loo
15.40.110
11.40.120
111.40.130
18.40.140
D.nnitlollJ,
Recauired.
Utility connoctlClII.
AppllcltICln-Fl1Inl.
Annual in.poetion required.
RollllpoctiCln.
C.rtlneatl-Conllnto anel whl" yoicl.
Ix.m,tio"l.
OW1lor<<cupllel elwol1lllll.
InlOrior illJpocllon. .
Appoall by Inril\'ocI "rlOlII.
Vlolltllln-P.llllty.
Enforce mint-Public nullOnc..
PIIIa1u.I-Lat.llWzl..
!nt_i1111l1 altOl'\'llUWI.
L5.~l).OtO DEFINtTIOl'lS. A. "Dlroctor" m.'''' t~t i:l:rlctllr
ot Community Development Cor tn. Cll)' or .~llIla.
(....11II 3.1...01 353
L
-
BUn.OINOS AND CONSTRUCTION
(
II. "Chanr' cru.." Ill.alll t.o llCClIIPY I IIll1t tor oth.r thall I
rtllitllc. tor all. (Imlly.
C. "Cl~y" rr."1I1 tha City ot AIII.a.
O. "Occupancy" llIMllI any penon who lICC\lpltcll IUIlt. whether
II an 0""'" or telllnt or p.nnl".. ohll. own.r,
E, "Own.r" inolllu, 'h. lpn' at the owll.r.
Po "P.noft" lllaaftl t!la II\ClYhlllal, p,"II"lhlp, oorporlllon or
aaaoclatloft or Ilia nlleal "'11' a( Ill)' a( the tar.pln,.
G. "UIII'" Illaalll the nalulI,lal d_IIII1, lilli' ba I Ilnrl..
(Imily, ~wo-(amUy or 1Illl1tlrlmlly ""Iclance lNlldlnr. -hloIi it
root awuroOCCUplN, ..cllllllll' 1lIO&e!a, hotela, 1'OOlIIin, IIlNMa ancl
boartlllllhollll. IDd Ilmllar IlYiIlf aecammod.allolll. COrd. 2311 t
1. 111.1.
18.4(1.010 llZQumll:>. No panona ahall rans. I..... OOOIlp)'
or oth.rwi.. p.:mll IllY d_lIIl1,ulllt which la lMreaAlr Y__
lIy lha prniall' _Uplllt thana( to be r_pt_ IUIIII NOb IUllI
la rqiltlred with &U CttJ 01 Anaa CommllllltJ Davelopmllll
Deparemalll or provided with I cenltlcate a( ..emplloll. COrel.
29. t 1. 111'1.
18,40.030 trmJTY CONNECTION. No CIIIInmloD a( UIU!.
II... IlIcludln, water. .lectriclty, alld PI, ahall be raada Ibr any
dWllllnl ullit wlllm hu b..1I YlealM by III prior OOC\Ipall"
uIII_ Iuch 111111 b.. b..n rali.t.red II Nquinlcllll thla cllapter
and thl owner pr...n:. prool a( relilerllloft ar proot or aumpllon
co the utility compallY, (Ord. 2381 t 1. 118'1.
15.0&0.04(1 APPLICATtON-rtLINO. '"" 0WftII' at rttr'1 rantal
ullit IlIaU. prior to ralltllll or t'&OCcuPTin, a rtn\a1 unl\, 011,,111 an
annl:al rtliatraclon ancllrwpaction OOl'\lllcate INIII 1Iw Commu'
nity o.".lopm.nl Olrector by nllll' a written application all I
tOI'lll to be pr..cribacl by lIIa COlllmllnitT !:Javalopllllnl'Diractor
alld plyment at an annllll "liaeratlan and inapactlon .... lII_
tar. Slid r..a .baU be Mt by "plrata "aollllloll 01 tIIa Clt)'
Cauncilin Iccardanc. Willi Ippllclbla SIal' Law. COrel. 2388 t 1.
118'1,
(
(
(...._ 3.11.101
314
.
(
RESIDENTIAL BENTA1.INSPECnON
la.~O.OIlO "'\~1..AL INBPlCTION REQUIRED. 'nil Com mil.
lIiey Oly,lopmlnt Olrltcor Illall 0&l1li 'loll rlllc,1 proptny to b,
(
l
3114-1
"...._ J.~'iOl
..
.-
J..
(
R1SItlZ:o..'TL\L RE:STAl rnSP!:C':'IO~
{
IlIIptC'" " I..., onel annually tor compllallcl with IppUcOIbl1
_'1011I 011\&11 IIIcl 1011&I IOcltI rellllnl 10 Hllinl, bulletill',
hul'" and lat.IY, and proplny lll&Inlln&IICIl.
W\ln Inlpecdon rl\'I&1I 1 violadon. Ill. prop,"y o"''''r Ilulil
be proyld.d willi. ...,illln nodce dtlCrl~lnl d\t Ylolllioll. loca.
lton and a "'lolI,bl. 11m. tor complllnat. (Orcl. 23.... 1. 111111.
lUO.oeo JU:I~SP!CTION. "'hen Ylollllelllll't (ollncl. Ihe
propony ownar will be elI'reM tor all COlli incUlT'cl b)' ,h. CIIl'
tor oll"lnln, oom,lIl11c, plll'l\lllll 10 proviliolll III (trill ill Sec.
tloD 11.01.100 " HeI. of 11111 Codl. lOrd. 13811 II, lI1U).
11.40.011- CElTIl'ICATZ-COmE:\'TS AND wm:~ VOID.
A. TIle rental rtf\Imlton ctnlIIcall IhIll tx1llr. on. m ~'.ar
tftma tIlt.II of 1u\llllC' or UfOII chu.. ot,ropon)' own,ralllp.
.. TIle rell,,1 fIIIl'rallOD cenUlca" Ihall I"":
1. TIle"" otlulal.
3, TIle 1.,.1 11II of ,hi "o,'nr.
S. TIle Mdrlll oft. prop'nr.
.. 'nil propmy oWller' I 1\1III1 11I11 add:tu.
I. It. rept,.,lon lI\&l11btr.
.. TIle date at 'lIplr.".",
1. AAy otller ponill.n, Intorllla&lol\. lOrd. 23111 , 1. 1118111.
111.0&0.010 IXZ'-IPTIONI. 'nl. nqwn",.n' tor In InnuII in
Ipec'ion .nll IIInllAl nli"rl'ion thall nOlI"I)' to Ihl ".ilawin,
L ()wnerooeC\I,llct IIwtlllnp.
2. Mobil. home 'lrlu which M''t b"lIluu'cI I Clrt!!1:iltl a1
"'a1'llon.
S. It_nn..,lon olulm'l.. Iurll.1I oll'by Ihl uulil)' r~: !aclt ~
payment. IOrcl. 2388 I 1. 11181.
l
'CIIt_ II .0 _In..'... _I.N nUlllb..eO 1'..O.oea ~. ".,or '."" "'.....
. \' 0 at'" .~~H....."~iv, ~:. ~uy ...~!\.I:,.Q,
,he ....n. of ,... IIC\II"'.I Ill.... lJ." .
,_t4 '"In..... ...,,,.. I~II oll.n".
''''.....u:;~u
355
..
.
0'
. -
1t.11.~I~CS A.'lD CONSTtUJCnON
18.40.080 OWNI:1l.0CCU~IJ:D DWI:LLINQI. All own.r.
occupl.cI liw.ll\np Iban be 1111114 I cenlftcI" of .x.mptlon In
1I.u of II relt"..Uon Ctrclftcacel.lpoQ r.qlitle In COllJllMtlon w\cll
. R..l Prap.rty Ilecordl ft.pon. !aiel c.nlftClClI ot IXlmptlon
Ihlll b. v.lIel ror thin)' el.,., fIoolll elaet at \tI1I1 .nel chan volel.e1.
Rtqu'''1 ror .x,mptlon \\'11\ b. prac....el.nell..u.e1upon rec.ipt
o( tll. Clt)"l copy 0' chi K..l ProPlrt)' at;ordll\tpon ,11n.e1 by
tll. bl.l)'.r. Nor.. than bl dlUI.e1 ror c.nlRcace or .x.mption
iuu.e1 in conjuncelon with & R.al Prop.n)' RlCar. I.pon. (Orli, _
23.9 11. lilll).
1UO,OlO INTEJUOR ~sp!cno:ss. W1uIn chaatarior iJI.
Ip,ction atv.. .vleltllCt at poulblt Illemor UflcCl or uc tldrtllll
ICact of tXClrlor dU.plcl&Uoft txiltl. WI IIIIpICCOr IIIa11l1avI ell.
nlhe co zulca &11 I.Ctriar latp.moL Nachh\r sa dlIa cllapttr
lhall prohlbt& III InCtrtor IftlptcUall fIl UCJ' ....UIaI ute whln
the d1nnor or hla ilatl",,1 rellll"u. &ad Ia panted. III"" ~ ebe
41'1''11'' or occllpallcl at a WlI\. (Ord. m. 11, 1111),
~
1UO,l00 "'PIALI BY AGGIIE\"lD PlllIO:Sl. MY pe..
lOll anrll'" by tha clettrmllllcloll at tbe mncwr I&IIftr chI1
chApttr ma)' apptal CO tht Clt)' Admlnltera.. hill I",al mlllt
be I1Itcllll wriellll withlll 11\'111 cia)., after thlllOtlftcacloll CO tha
"I"I.vad pa.1011 at the ucllioll belnl appalllel. 1.14 1"..1
lIIute be III "TlUII,lIl1d mlllc Ica" with parttcu\aric, tht rellOn
why thl Director', eltel,lon II b.lnl coattlcecl. Tha Clc, Aclmlnil.
tra"r ,hili Illu. a Wl'itulI el.clllon 011 ch. ap,._1 wichln thirty
tla)'1 of the rec'lp' at tha ",;".n ."..1. 'nit .....1.... pertOn
.holl ... no'in.clln wrleln, or chi clecllloll 01\ th. &ppeal. COrcl,
23.. 11. 1"'1,
lS~O,UO vtOL"nONS-P!~.u.TY, All)' pertlll\ who vlolleel
IllY provilion or thll chop"r il clt.mtclauilty at alltild.maanor,
Inel IlpOIl collvlctioll th.reot Ihall be ,ullilhtcl It)' a nil. not
,xcHdlnr $500.00. or ~ ImprllOllm.nt 1ft Jail !'or . period noc
.xclldlnl six monchl. or by lloth Illeh nn. alld Imprilonm,nt.
lOnl. 2389 11. 11181,
lUO.120 ENFORCE:'IENT-PCBLIC NUISANCE, It Ihllll
be eOll'iel.r.el I pulllic nui..llc, to lIa\'t or maintllll Iny l't'"t31
tAl.... HI,'"
"
351
-
(
RESIIlEN"l'lAL RENTAl. I:-iSPECTION
prop.rt~. which. ypolI llllptC\lon, t.U. to IOlIIplr with .tat. anel
lotal I.",.. II th.). r.lat. III h'ula.It.Ada.... proplrty lIIainl..
lIanel. bllllelln. cod.. or local 1011111' NqIlIrtIlltIlU. 'nt. director
.haU ha,', the pow.r \0 reqlllre OOl'I'ICttoll of daft.I.II.I.. leI.ntl.
n.c1 throll.h propl")' IRlp_toll II)' lIIia. tII. pHCIdllN Mt fo"h
In S.ction 15.0'.010 It eeq. or tbit Code. <Ord. 2Slt 11, 11111.
1!.",0.130 p!.~.u:m:S-LA.TI J1LINO. My pI!'IOlI who rail.
to .pply (or &II IMllal reptratlon uullup_lon c:tmn~t. II
rtquired b)' thia chaplIlr, IIl4 witbiD tIlIl tim.. required by this
chaptlr. ,Ilall pay a penalty ot till pll'Clnt ot tII. ,ppUClt;on r..
aet PUrlll&llt to SecttOD 15.40.040 lbr each IIIODth or pan th.reoC
anar the date tll. appUoadoa WM N TIle =t7I11I,Y be waived
or abated br dI. Dinctor of c:-.1IJIib' 1.,111.1\' Cor pel
llI\ItI. (Ord. 20&". . 1. 11101.
15.0&0.140 L''I'ORCDIINT ALTIL'fATIV!S. A. NotAln.
heraiD 111111 prt\'ID' tU ~ otWl tllaptar by criIII1na1.
dvU. or IdminiltratiYlICClOlllIIU. W\derUkIIlllldivtdually or
1ft COnJllIIlItioll with odIer . aM-
I. TIle ___t or tIIia ahapter by a criInlM1, ciYU or ad.
tnintattltlYl ac:Uol\ ,ball DO& I'IUIYI the propII'\)' ownar at hiI or
h.r a"Upttona undar tblI cbaptlr. lOrd. 2441 t I. \"01.
(
L
['!'lI. ...1 ,... \I 1731
".... 3.\UO'
35'7
MEMO TO COUNCIL
MESA, ARIOZONA CRIME FREE
MULTI HOUSING PROGRAM
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE
TO: Honorable Mayor and Common Council
FROM: Jeanne Fitzpatrick, Administrative Anal
DATE: June 21, 1994
SUBJECT: Rental Housing Inspection Program
COPIES: Shauna Clark, City Administrator; Dan Robbins, Police Chief; Al Boughey,
Planning and Building Director; Rachel Clark, City Clerk; David Schultz, San
Bernardino Board of Realtors; Richard Kimball and Richard Brooks, Sun
Newspaper
At the meeting of June 6, 1994, the Council asked for information on the success of rental
housing regulation programs in other cities. I received some information from the city of Mesa,
Arizona with respect to their Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program implemented in 1993 which
resulted in a 67 % reduction in crime related calls within the rental property areas.
This program involves a three level process designed to comprehensively train property
managers and tenants on issues of property maintenance, security requirements, crime
prevention, etc. This program also encompasses the inspection of rental properties. The
decision to implement this program was made upon the determination by the Police Department
that the city's crime rates had increased in areas housed with deteriorating rental properties.
Thus, combined with the inspection of rental properties, a comprehensive educational program
was implemented. Mesa, Arizona has a population of 325,000 of which 1/3 (100,000) are
ren ters.
An integral part of the Rental Housing Program proposed to be adopted within the city of San
Bernardino, is the implementation of an educational program for property managers and tenants
similar to the program developed by the city of Mesa. Attached is an article about Mesa's
program as well as a report written by Timothy Zehring, Crime Free Zone Coordinator with the
city of Mesa. These documents outline the positive impacts of their program. I have
highlighted areas of interest within these documents that we hope to incorporate in our program
as well.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at Ext. 5122.
The Mesa Crime-Free
Multi-Housing Program
By
TIMOTHY L. ZEHRING
Like nlOSI ellles In ;he
Sun .Bell. Men, Ari.~un..
continues to experlencc
rapid growth. Its population has
11carly doubled each decade this
century. Such growth and its ac-
companying mcrease in crime cre-
ale great challenges for local law
enforcement.
For the Mesa Police Depllrl'
mcnt, spiralinc crime rates in the
cny 's numerous apanmelll commu-
nities presented a panieularly de-
manding problem. To reduce this
criminalaelivily, the police depal\-
menl developed the Mesa Crime-
rree Multi-Ilousing Program.'
The ~rogram UgS . three-level
"I'proac to eliminate crime in
a(lul\ment communities and 10 nl-
duce calls for pollee ~rvlee. Thill'
IS accomplished through a cum.
prellensive Irainina proaram for
propcrty manllcers, Slrlct security
rCljuirenlents for partielpal!na
pr'opcnies. and crime prevention
'raming for residents. Mellll Pulice
Dcpllllmelll crnne prevention .pe
,';lIliSlS conducl each phase of the
program.
U:VI::L OlliE-PROPERTY
\1A'IAGER TRAINING
The first level. In B.llour Iruin.
lng ~emin8r for lnUnl\gers. CUVl:r~
IOplCS pertinent tn Ihe nvcrall
()perUl ion or an aparlment com.
pic.. These tn ics include ereatin .
explainin!!. an enfurein. renlal
6 ' 1"81 Law Enforcemant Bull.tln
a~re.m.nts. idenlitvll1" iIIe al ac'
"U\t1l '. an "'0,1' 11 I wi I, I' .
I~c.'i,,) cl1lphn~I.'" IS flivl.:li Iu \ruin.
ing nUll1~gcr, ,In 'lppliCllnt <<""n'.
illg and -the eYidiclI\ IlrDl"tSlj.
^pplle8nl Sc:reenin&:
!>roperty Il1ftnll~erS ICOlrl1 ""
bestn the screening I'rocc', 1.1)
discussing the Crime-Free \1\1lll'
Hnusinll Pmllrum with applic'''"l'
-
Th~y adviNC polenlial relldenu Ihal
Ihe complex Coopera.e. wilh the
Mesa Police Ocranmenl 10 muin-
lain the quality of the neillhborhood,
Pl'llpeny manallers alxo in{om1 ap-
plicanl. Iha. they will underlO an
exlensiY. screenlnll process, based
un u Iisl of selected crateria Ihal they
al'c aNked 10 review,
The NCreenini crilcri. sel fonh
the reusnn. for which manallemcnt
cannot deny rental 10 appliclll1l~.
based on Fair Hou~ing laws. Thesc
laws prohlbil di!ICrlminalion for rea.
snns of race. color, religion, s..,
nalional IlrIll In , handicap. marual
,ltltUS, familial "atus, and olhers,
depend ins on the area.
Howeyer. manasers may
choos. nOI to rent 10 pel owners or
smoken. because they are nol con-
sidered "prolected clas~s" under
Fair Housing laws. Managers may'
also deny rental to individuals con-
Ylcted in lhe IUI 5 )lean for manu-
faeluranll nr .elling drugs. or fur
any crime Ihal wnuld pose a Ihreal
10 Ihe propen)l or interfere wilh
olher l'eSldenls' aceful en'o men I
01 Ihe resl enees. Sueh of en~e'
may 1l1c1(,dc rclX!aled dislurbances.
gamblll1l!. PIO,lillllion. vinlenee_
(hreals of' violence. and raoe.
II' additlon4l1llnagers lell appli-
cants thai they 'nn be denied remal
pnYIi~!les If a previous landlord reo
pnned ,ueh prnblen15 a! damalle IU
renlal properly. fuilun: 10 pay rem.
allo\lo'lIljll1onresidenls 10 move into
their a"anmenl~. nr failure to prn-
vldc flroper nOlice when vlIcating a
profleny, Mi~repre,el1linll informa.
lion on Ihe lIpplicalion may also lead
!l11'elecllnn.
AI 1111, roil1l. hijlh.risk indi.
vidl!OII~ nften s.rccnlhemselves OUI
of eunsldcl'ulion by opling nOI 10
II
The protJrem u.e. .
thfH-/evel approach
to elimInate crIme
In apartment
communItIes... .
"
Res"... Ofllctr Zatrnng" a crime prevenl/OIl
spec,al," WIlli IIIet Me... AfI_. PoIioe Department,
apply. tnth., way, providing infoI"
malion up front reganJinglhe apan-
menl compiu's panicipation in thc
crime.free program aCls as a deter-
rent 10 some polemial lenams. 1'01'
applic.lnts who choose 10 seek resi-
dency. property managers ,creen
lnem by checking refereOl'cs and by
usin!: local credit reponinp agencies
10 conduct background and eredi'
,hecks.
Apprnvf:u applicants recei ve- a
,opy ot the drug.lr" leue ad-
(lliJncum aevelopea by the U.S. De.
panment of Housin~ and Urban
!)evelollmem. The lense addendum
represents a Civil aj:I'eem.nt bl>.
Iwecn the rn n mana 'em"ln and
Ihe re.'1 en\. esidents OIgree nC1llo
en!:i1!:e in lll1Y type ornilllll1i11 ,Klil"
ity, including drug.related nimc'
and acts nrrhrcals o(v;oll,n,c. on or
lIear the premises.
The lease addendum also a", a'
iI Sl.'reeni"p tool for l11ill1apCr" V'u.
'1IIy. dishune,t aprliCOlnl' will 11111
sijll1 sud1 un allreclnelll. hel'OIII'" if
Ihe)' do ,"""nlil any of the h'I,'"
orrenscs. the landlord can illlllledi.
ntely hegin lne eYiClion pro""".
---- ~.
aCCOrding 10 local landlord and ten-
ant laws.
The Evlcllon Process
Properly manallers know the
tYJIIls of eYietion nOlicCll anHable
and the proces5 for IlCrving Ihem. as
weU as understanding tne proee-
dureH ot' the enfire eyietion process.
'ior example. while COl1YiClinll an
individual on a criminal charlie re-
Iluires provinS iUUl "beyond II (,Cll-
,onable doubl:'I.ndlnrd~ may evi"
residents based nn a singlc Yiolatiun
and with only a prepondernnce uf
eVlucl1CC. Th.t is. if eYidencc exislS
In fll'<lve thai residen" "rroOOhl}'''
violated the lease 'Jrcemenl. they
can he cYieled. This evidence may
he no more fhan the test imunv or
mher I'I:sidents who wilnessellhe
viotalion,
Although Ihe Mesa Crime-Free
Mulli.llollsinll Program review,
Ihc evktion process wilh lI1;mllgcrs.
the ~lI'\)pnlln is llovcmed by Ihe phi.
In'ophy Ibat "an ouncc of prevcll'
111m is wonh a pound of cure." Be-
etluse Ihe eYiclio:l process IS
ltifl1cull and expensivc, Illann~ers
Juna 1994 i 9
.
prefer lO ICrMlI OIIt polelltlally dls-
rupdve appllcanla when \hey apply.
Prvperty man..en uee eVCly le,a1
meana available to ac:eomplllh thaI
loaI.
1.0"1 On. ConelllJloa and
C.rtlfteatlon
An overview of the nellt level of
the pro,ram concludes the firsl
trainlns lellion. Althillime. man-
a..n learn what !hey mUll do 10
Ilti5fy the requirements of the sec-
ond level, which il baaed on a
J!IOjlORy . inspcctlon. This allows
manaaen lO Prolfllll to the nelll
level only when lIIey feel their prop-
erty la read)', lIIul lavin, them-
Hives and the Mesa Police Depart-
ment the time and expense thaI more
than OM lnapeclion would require.
As they will in levell two and
three, manasen who complete thc
firatlevel of trainlna receive a cer-
tificate proclalmina their achieve-
ment, Displaying II in lIle propcnv
office of the apartment complell "
sistaln attracllna honest applicants,
while dctel'l'in8 dlshoftClt onea.
In addition to providin, writlcn
recopilion of the man..e...' suc-
cess, members of the Meaa Police
Depanment's Crime Prevention
Unit encourase managers to main-
tain close telephone contact with the
unit. The unit also moniton pro-
aress by requirina thai propeny
manacen submit monthl)' repons.
LEVEL TWO-CRIME
PREVENTION THROUGH
ENVIRONMENT ALDESIGN
The IeCOnd level of the pro-
,ram is crime prevention thro~
environmental desiln (CPTED)7
,which livel proper~ managers
the knowledae !hey n to prOleCI
!heir PropertJ~lnlt crime. The
concepu of ~ Include nalural
sUNemance. acceal control, terrlto-
rialilY. and acllvilY IUPpcm,
To many, CP'T'ED represents a
new concept, but it has existed for
many years, Por elllmple. the
Anasui Indiana of the Soulllwelt
lived hiSh above the plains on clift's.
which afforded "a/ural surveil-
larJCe, Prom the clifftopl. they could
see inyaders who were miles aWaY.
The Jadde" used 10 reach the plains
below lhe Anasazis' climop homes
provided oeuss eo"rrol. Removin.
lheae laddon at nllht Il1Idc access
difficult. If not impossible.
"
The concepts of
CPTED Include natural
surveillance, acce..
control, terrltorla/lty,
and activity support.
"
In addition, the city looked well
cared for and prolecled. thereby
exhibitinl,erriloritllity. Colleclive-
Iy, the Anasuil would conduct
their daily chores of latherlnl food
and cleaninl. thus ereatina tlctivity
support.
Unfonunately, many modem
I.:Ul\ll\lunitiel aIe nOI designed II
carefully as the Anawj ymqes, A
recent case in Men dcmonsUItCI
the need for CP'l'BD. A woman WII
brutally raped in her apanment after
she opened Ihe door to see who was
knocklnl' Thil crime milht have
been avoided If her apanment door
had been equipped with a simple
eSevl_ eyeYlewer, or "peep-
hole," Had !hero been an eyevlewer.
she milhl nOI have opened the door.
Or, quite possibly. Ihe IUlpect
would have skipped her door com-
plewl)', He would have ehOllln an-
other door-one without an eye-
viewer-in order to calch his victim
off luan!.
As noled. propeny managers
learn durin, the first phase of their
trainina that the apanment complex
mu..1 mce\ cenaln minimum secu-
rity requirements mandaICd by the
pollee department to qualify for
level-two certification. These in-
clude deadboltl on .11 exlerior
doon. double lockl for windowl,
I g().dearoe eyevlewers on all fronl
doors. and. shrubs trimmed below
!he window Uno. In addition, Mesa
crime prevention apeclallsts may
require other meuuru. depending
on the complex.
When property managers be-
lIeW! that their axnplex ~IS the
requlmnenll of the eecond phase, a
MOIa crime pNventlon specialisl
concIlICIa an on.site In'J'lldion of the
apartment complllll. Followinl a
succeasfullnapectlon. lhe manasc-
ment receives a second cemficalc.
LEVEL THREE-TRAINING
FOR RESIDENTS
Jf manqers wish to progress 10
the third and fInaIl",el of lIIe pro-
aram, they musllIChedule crime prt:-
vention trainlna for residents. Most
manaaen provide incentives-such
II pizza parties. barbecues, or polo
luck dinnen-to draw residenls 10
this cvent. Added incentives include
muaical enlenalnmenl provided by
residents aneS door prizel donated
by local bUlinesses. In Mesa, many
,
10 I FBI Law Enlorctmtnt Bullttln
.
locII bUllneuel wUllnaly donlte
IivUWl)'I t.o IUppan the orime-free
efton. becauae they realize that the
well.beln& Glthe nelpborhoocl hu
a direct ef'tcct on their bullneaeel.
PI" .
o Ice cnme prevention ape-
cialiltl addre.. leverll tODic.s
durina these meetln... P'lI'It, they
explain the 1_ Iddendum u it
pertains to the crime-free zone.
They make it clear that the Idden.
dum addreuel onl)' illegal activity
commiued on or near the property:
managen wish to maintlin a ~afe
environment for residenll, no! to
dictate moral it)' or noncriminal
behavior.
The specialists Ilso dlscu..
~nera1 safe1i and crime prevention
lechniQues or llIOClflc offenses,
such IS lut.omobUe theft. IIOXUal u-
SlUIt, and ::/IfY. Many UpeelS of
ihellO mee I pII'IIlel a neighbor-
hood watch prtllelltation, and in ef-
fect, train tenlllltlto be the eves IIIld
ears of the lDIrtment community.
Al'ler compledna thIa level. the
mllllapr receives the third certifi-
cate. This certificate, along with the
othen. IClndl I me....e to a1llppll-
canl5-honest and high-risk-that
residenta look for IIId report crimi.
nal activity.
In additlon, propertlea that com-
plete all three levels of the pro,ram
may purchue I strildnl, four-color
siln Imprinted with the Mesa
Crlme-Pree Multl-Housln, Pro-
,ram 10'0 to post on their property.
While the)' have earned lhil privi-
lege, it II jUlt that-a privilele.
Mana,en must sign IIIl qreement
with the police department that they
will abide by all prolrun luidelines
or lose pernUslion to polt the sign.
Complexes quality for the manda-
tory yearly renewal by holdln. at
leut one crime prevention mcelin.,
in conjuncclon with the Meal Police
Department, durin, the year. Man)'
manalen conduct these meetinls
quaMcrly or even monthly.
Properly manlsen mlY Ilso
use the Mesa Police Department
pros ram logo in all of their
advenising, including the telephone
director)', aplrtment ,uides. and
newspaper ads. This alerts potential
applicants of tbe pannenhip be.
tween the police department and the
apartment community. Ie also at-
ttacts honest relllers, who want 10
live in a "crime.free" environment.
In that regard, managers sign IIIl
agreement not 10 advertise that the
propert)' is. in fact. crime-free, only
that they have joined Mesa' s crime-
tree program. This removes the
appearance of falae advertising
Mould lIIepllCtlvlty oecur on the
premi....
OTHER TRAINING
The Mill Fire Departmenl abo
providel optional tn.ining for apart-
ment manaaen, which is separate
from the pollee depanment' s pro-
gram. An hour-long seas ion in-
fotms mlllasera aboul seneral safe.
ty and fire safety In apartmenl
communities.
The tralnina covers such topics
as exlt!n. systems. nre a1ann sys-
lema, safely committees, pool
IICety. chemical lConse, property
Inspections. and cooperating with
the fire department. The depart.
menl a110 provide. an inConnalion
book1et for re.ldents and on-sile
Inspection. when requelled by
manlleJnenL
BENEFICIARIES OF THE
PROGRAM
_-~"'...:.IO_""'" .L....IIC'::n (.
P.ropert1 Ma1lIaerf:1i~''''' 'tF
- - - MInIa.n who join the Mess
Crime-Free Multl.Houslnll Pro-
lram may I Ole leIIIIIltl \0 lhc acrcen.
in IIIlCl eViction . Wh then,
wou mana en wanl loon I e
ro
Quite simply, mOlt manBllers
want 10 nmt \0 nondIsru~lve len-
ant.. ~. n:ntinl: to riminals
can lead to dramatic declines in
~rl)' values, IIOvere properly
~icconlami-
_loss of rent
durina evlc:dons and reDalrs. and
animosllv between residents and
manuerl. .
In COIltrUl, paniclpaling man.
alen reap numerous benefits
from tltl. program. The benefils 10
Jun.lee4l11
.... .....- - .
.
.
man.,en Include more luble and
lalilfted rulclenll. Increued de.
mand for rental unlll. lower maIn-
tenance and repalr COlli. hilhcr
propert)' value.. and peace of mind
from 'PCndlnl more lime on routine
manaaemenl and Ie.. time on crisis
control.
Por example. one apartmenl
complex had onI)' 6O-percent occu-
panc)' IIId was so crime-ridden tbat
police never ente~ the communily
withoul backup, After jolninll the
erlme.free pro,r.m. the complex
increll$Ol\ Its occ:uplllc)' to I ()() per.
cent, with I waldnl 1111. And. the
pOlice depanntenl now receives
few. if III)'. caU. for aervlce.
Lla= and foneiNre are other
reuons ~clPate In
the DrO!!!!!:.... _ ~anRllers
renllO dlll4el'OllJ mmina1s but i~
"'hore llleu VtOlenlllCl\lVlor. mana .
ers co
. ur.
ther. if property manaprs know.
in.ly renl to dru. criminal.. the)'
risk aeizure of their propertY by law
enforcemenl. By participatinl in the
proarun.lben. manqcn have a cIc.
fense a.ainsl law suits and lelal
forfeilu....
Finally. participalinl managers
also benefil from the ravorlble
publicity ,eneraled by the prolram.
The Mesl Chamber or Commeree
publishes I list of parliclpallnl
members, which is Ivallable 10 pro-
speclive tenanlS upon reque!!.
Complexes with one certlftcalC reo
eel ve I tluee-sW' ruinS; two cer.
llficateS. a four-sW' ratinl; and all
three certificltes. a flve-sw rating.
This fealure has Induced man)'
properly managers 10 join Ihe
pro,ram.
CONCLUSION
WhlIe one IncIlvldual or law en.
forcement oft\oer may nol be able
In addition. becauae ~lIIIIers to pNVetlt crime s1nIle-handedly in
beUer un~e~land ~e. difference an eDWe Swe <<city. crime CIIl be
betw~ civil and cnmiJlal mlllm -ClUtIiled in tarplCc1 ueu when
followlRl the first phase of th. raiclellll ICCepI ruponllbility for
prosram. the dep~enl has e~" ~ own "iiiYIftjnrne1it' Tile ~e~B
perlenced a a~batanllll decreue m ~r1m~ Mulli. ousint! Pro.
calls of a CIVil nature. In ~lCt. -tralel that even renlers
overall. Ihe depart!"enl receives rfeet "pride of ownership" to.
fewer calis for service from cum- w.JrCI ~Ir communmcs.
pleltes thlt have completed the Apartment managers IIId resl-
proamn. denll, workina In cooperation wilh
Th. Community law enforcemenl. are leaming ,Ihal
Th M C' F Multi Ihey can help 10 control Crime,
,e esa nme. ree - n.y can live in a crime-free zone.
HOUSing Program reaches, ,mor~ and tOlether lhey can make a
thlll the apanment commumUes; II differe +'
benefits Ihe enllre Mesa area. Many nee.
burllan and other criminals work
Within close proximity of their resi.
dences. bUI Iheir aClivities can
spread into neighborinll communi-
ties as well, As a R.sult. n:mo~ing
The Department
Since the proll'llTl's Inception
in January 1993. the Mela Police
DepattmeRl has trained aver 600
mana~ers, There has been a
groundswell or support from
managers and resldems alike. om.
cers are also receiving more cooper-
ation in their dealinls with property
mlllagers.
"
Apartment manag.r.
and r..,d.nt....are
I.arnlng that t/l.Y
can h.,p to control
crlm..
~~~,
"
offender. from a particular area
usually evokes a dOOreaAC In crime
In !he IIIlire area, a"Kllt,s as much
.1 a square mile. Armed robberies.
auto !heftl. and criminal dllmRIC are
jual a few of !he crimes thai may
doc"'.... Thla impro~elthe overall
health and appearance of the enlire
community and may increase prop.
erty values al well.
Purther. because of thc hi gber
Incidence of crime and gramti in
inner cities nationwide, many
people lpend their money at re-
gional ahoppina centen and malls
outside of once-8ourishina down-
town dlItrlelI. Inner-city businesses
cenainly benefit from cleaner and
ufer neipborttood. as they setup
crime-free and dNs.free zones,
w_
MIu', c:rtrne.JIne Multi-Uou.i". rra.,am
_1dIpIod _ I.......... Ofla1nally
do.elapod "" ,_ CImIlOoU, . pri....
.......1_ illl'O<l,*, OnIon,
'2 I FBI Law Enloroem.nt Bulletin
-. -_._---""'-~
~~
~..~
CRJME FREE MULTI-HOUSING
PROGRAM
....
3
In April 1992, Tim Zehring took a comprehensive approach in dealing with chronic
drug dealing and illegal activity ocCUITing within Mesa's apartment complexes and
multi-housing units.
A national search was conducted in the summer of 1992 to learn about any successful
programs locally or abroad. Based on a Landlord Training Program developed by
John Campbell and the Portland Pouce Department, the Mesa Police Department
piloted the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program in November of 1992. This new
Crime Free Multi-Housing Program offered a unique, more structured approach to
the growing problems of urban corruption and decay.
One of the basic principles of Community Oriented Policing is the development of a
partnership between the police and the community. The most effective wav to
address societal roblems such as crime fear of crime, social disorder and
neill'hborhood decay is y g a proactive stance to ne1 an
maintenance.
The Mesa City Council gave ofacialsanction to tbie PfOltam in J.Tln."'Y of 1998, and
it was implemented city-wide immediately. Proven benefits from the first year have
)een:
· A positive impact on crime in our community by reducing calls for service
in the participating rental properties.
· An increase in public support of the law enforcement efforts in participating
rental properties. .
· 1m rovements made to rental 0 erties from im lementation of
security hardware (i.e. eadbolts, eyeviewer8, win ow 10c:k8, etc.) to
m lete facelift.s and renovations of older ro '88. (1dan ro 'es
have spent thousands 0 0 an to re an re appearance 0
their properties to qualify as memben of this program.)
Because nearly one-third of the metropolitan area lives in rental ~perti~s, we had
to develop a program that was honest and direct. It had ~ ~ solutio.n onen~d. ~t
had to be simple, yet very effective in dealing with drug actlVlty and Vlolent cnme ln
rental properties.
A very unique coalition of property owners, manager~1 tenants and the police was
-~-~--~~-~~. ~.~~
, formed to facili~te this goal. A comprehensive, eight hour training program was
developed to train all who would be a part of this massive effort.
All orthose. parti~pants. receive a diploma, personally signed by Chief Guy Meeks,
that they display m therr rental offices. In conjunction with a "Crime Free Lease
Adde~du~", and crimi';lal background checks, applicants are immediately aware of
the Slncenty of the police and property manager to reduce criminAl activity on the
property. .
:)
The . second phase req~es property managers to meet the minimum security
reqUlrement of the police department under C.P.T.E.D. guidelines (which are
nationally used and accepted).
The third phase requires a blockwatch type of participation from the residents of the
property.
Mer completion of all three phases, the property is eligible to display the full
compliment of certifications and metal signs on the property.
This program was developed with hopes it would become a national model. Many of
the als that were slated for the first ear were achieved in the first r
ro am has met with such p enome success, it has assed all of our own 8
an expectations.
In May 1993, just live montha after implementation, the Criine Free Multi-Housing
program was a highly touted program preaented to hundreda of law enDm:ement
officials at the t.E.C.C. Conference in Phoenix. It wu here the program received it's
greatest exposure to police agencies around and beyond the metropolitan Phoenix
area. Immediately, police agencies contacted Tim Zehring to receive help in
developing their own Crime Free Multi-Housing programs.
Since the summer of 1993 there have been several olice a encies from the Valle ,
t e tate an even 0 er states w ve 1m emen ell' own 8 as.
on the successftU Mesa ~. . ona: Phoenix, en e, Tempe, Peoria,
Gilbert, Kingman and Bu e. The next cities slated for certification to teach the
program are Scottsdale, Chandler and Tucson.
To keep the program uniform from city to city, all police agencies must have their
appointed instructor certified by Tim Zehring. They must attend a minimum of eight
hours of classroom instruction, eight hours of program management instruction, and
them become members of the Arizona Crime Free Multi.HolUiTl6 Association. This
hsociation (founded by Tim Zehring) meets monthly to keep the integri~ of the
program at an optimum, and communication channels ~pen be~een age~Cl~s. The
Arizona Multi-Housing Association and the Arizona Mobile H.o~ng ~8OClatio~ were
so impressed with the program and it's results, they petitioned TIm Zehring to
become members of the coalition of police departments involved in this effort. In
exchange for their membership, these Associ,tions have provided free legal help m
regard to the multiple-family industry, technical support for developing pamphlets
and training materials for the cluses, and their oflieial endorsements of the program
to encourage participation from their members.
In November 1993, the city of Aurora, IL sent two (2) police Lieutenants and their
City Attorney to Arizona to be certified to teach in nJinois. They have also begun to
form the T1Hnn;~ r.rimA F,.AA Mult;-Hnul!;"i Al!l!nMlOt;nn, and are m regular contact
with us.
In December 1993, the Sellars Group, a Salt Lake City based property management
company, organized a statewide training for all county and municipal police agencies
in Utah. Tim Zehring presented the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program to over 60
law enforcement officers and property managers from all over the State of Utah.
Several of those agencies are already printing their class materials and implementing
the program statewide. These agencies have begun the first steps m forming the
Utah CrimA F,.",,,, MPlti-Hnu~;ni' Al!l!ndlltinn.
~
There have also been at least a half-dozen televillion spots that have featured
property managen, residents and police program coordinaton on local news stations.
All of these news reports have been overwhelmingly poIitive.
A radio and a television talk show have also given substantial air time to discuss the
benefits of this program. These shows were met with u;tremely positive feedback:.
Man: chiefs of lice citizens and ro mana have written countIes. letters
suPportin2 the Crime Free M ti.Ho~ Pro~. sprea 0 s program ~
limited only to the few people who can't train eno~ peopl~ qui~Y enough.. This
program is expected to achieve even greater reeogmtion as 1t 18 bemg featured 111 two
(2) national publications very soon.
r.~""""i"g Mrr.f.=iIU is running a February story whi~ ~ be circulated ~tion~de
to members in local, county and state government p081tiOns. The F.B.I. 1S plant~lng
a "cover story" to be featured in their March issued of TJr.", 1?".M7"t'I1m""t 'R7Jl11>tzn.
"'
To garner support from local judges, Tim presented his program before the bench of
the Maricopa County Justices of the Peace. It was widely accepted and has been
supported valley.wide with referrals from judges to property managers appearing in
court.
The program has also been attended by members of the A.C.L.U., The Arizona
Attorney General's Office and H.U.D., receiving strong support for the programs'
content and viability. ..
)
A total of 42 apartment communities conducted a Blockwatch. ,rogram for their
property, reaching nearly 3,000 residents in the first year. Of those properties, 34
achieved full certification in the Mesa Crime Free Multi.Housing Program. These
properties now proudly display 111 Crime Free metal signs on and around their
properties.
In December 1993, the Crime Free Multi=Housins Program received State awards
from the Arizona Crime prevention Association. Tim Zehring was recog%lized as the
o.,tlltll..t1;"g ~,.;m. p,.._ntinn 'PI'Al!titin...... in Arizona. The. View Apartments, who
facilitates most of the trsIi ni'lp, received the award for O"btIo...Ii"1 r"",f:pj1mtinn Tn
Ct"imA 'P.-AvAntinn ~ III 'RumnA"'''' (Incidentally, the Mesa Crime Pr.~on Unit was
also names as the Onbrt.."di"l ~mA ~"tinn TTflit-iD::the-State).
The Crime Free Multi-Housing I'Iogram is just be';"";"". We antlcipate even
greater accomplishments in 1994, with the implementation of the Crime Free Mnhil",
Housing Program and The Crime Free HntAl/MntAl Program, scheduled to kick off
this year.
In 1995, we are anticipating the Crime Free M;..i_~tn....i" Program and the Crime
Free Mini_MAll Program.
It is our goal that these programs will become national models and show that Mesa,
Arizona is truly a pioneer in Community Oriented Policing.
3
WINDSCAPE APARTMENTS
Total Calls For Service
330
2 Vean , Va.r Thu.
S.lor, , Safore 1st V,.r Far
1991 1992 1993 1994.
I
I '0'
1 ^
/ \
1/ \
1/
11 \
/1 ~28
I / -,-- 4... .- . ".___ -- -
.,J ~2
,.
300
200
"1994: 1 st Quarter Slats MultipUed Sy 4
75
70
65
60
:)
55
so
:",;..
WINDSCAPE APARIMENTS
Total DC1's
1191
5
1992
1993
1994.
71
60
- -~_....~~,'~-......
'1994: 1 at Quartlr Slats Mullipfild By~
~
.....
~
-
.-
.....
180
170
160
lS0
140
130
120
110
100
~ 90
.
.
80
70
60
50
40
SHADOW RUN APARTMENTS
Total Calls For Service
1991 1992 1993 1994.
I 168
.~
'4Q~r '"
W I ~37
,
\
I \
I \
\
\
\
~
.
I
'191M: 1.t Quarter Slats Multiplied By 4
'--.
i ,~.
SHADOW RUN APARTMENTS
Total OC1's
~o
1991 , 1992 191!13 1994.
,..
A.
/ '\
44/ '\
~ l\- I
! '\1Q
I \
, \
i \
\
~4
y
43
40
33
30
23
20
-18&4: 1 at Quarwr Slats Multiplied By 4
'~
;::;
SUN RIDGE APARTMENTS
Total Calls For Service
75
1991 I 1992 1993 1994*
77
If
/ \
i \
I j 1
11 \
II ,
1 \
/ \
/ , \
/ \
;J. ~ ~"
70
63
60
33
50
1.3
1.0
., 9114: , at Quarter Stall Multiplied By ~
I i) 1.5
I
SUNRIDGE APARTMENTS
Total DC1 's
35
1991 I 1992 1993 1994.
I 35
/\
i / \
/ \
/ \
, /1
I 2J I 1\
I I \
I
I \
\ .
~ u
30
25
20
10
., 994: 1 It Quarter Slats Mullioned By 4
10
I I
j. . . . . -!
I j
I I
, I
i 1
jlZ Z en Z ;l i'1
C C iC IP -1
'333-'CD
Ii i ;, i ;z:~j Ul
1~ ~ it... rB ~ 1 (1l
ls.a~aiil
j~fl'i!t ~
I CD Q. -'.. ... ~
1;i~ ! i'
If/> g i .
1~_ r j
ie.i .~
ilc. 1
I 1,
~
~
~
~
~
~
i
.:::-
...
!
~
o
c
...a.
N
o
o
I\)
o
o
c
co
o
c
...a.
en
o
o
~:~~.:- :: -:1:~ .~ ~::_ ~_: ~~ . :: _ _.=.. .-,;!.~~...
- .....- --.~ -- ~ .. - ~ - . - ..
. ~. - -- - - - -
. . _ _ ,A o.i _, _, '_' '. _0
- -~... ""--.""'........... ,"-~-, ....,,, .... . .-- '..
I\)
~
c
o
II.)
~
0)
(,.)
~
.....
(II
.,
I\)
co
c
o
s:
m
en
>
(")
JJ
-
~
m
'i1
JJ
m
.....m
~s:
~c
S?r-:
-~
a~
~ 0
c:
en
-
z
Ci>
"0
JJ
8
~
s:
~.
t.
'-'.'
TOTAL P.::
INFORMATION ON SANTA ANA
RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM
Assistant City Manager
l;.Xecu!ive Dil'eCtOf
Plannin\! and Buildin! A2ellCV
~-
~o\lcatJ.un l.~t Date:
May 16, 1994
MEMORANDUM
To,_
From:
Subject: .fJU!.P PROGRAM ITPDA TE
Since beginning operation in January of 1993, the Proactive Rental Enforcement Program has
completed the inspection of residential rental propenies in two de!ignated in~tion areas,
French Court and Heninger Park, and currently is in the initial stage of inspections in our third
designated area, French Park.
Inspections in the first PREP designated area, French. Coun, were begun in January of 1993 and
completed the following July. A summary detailin~ the activity resultin!: from the inspections
in French Court is as follows:
PREP inspected 123 ~enla! properties containing 1,100 units. The inspections
revealed 2,239 violations, including 1,160 immediate life-hazard category "A"
conditions, 782 non-life threatening "5" conditions, 172 primarily cosmetic .C"
conditions and 125 tenant caused "T" violations. The violations required 26
building permits, 30 electrical permits, S3 plumbing permits fIlld 5 mechanical
permits for a total of 114 permits. Five letters warning of possible legal action
by the City Attorney were sent to owners slow in completing repairs, but all
eventually complied and no referrals to the City Attonu:y were necessary.
Overall, the PREP program caused the rental owners in French Court to inve~t
in excess of $750,000 to upgrade their properties.
PREP has recently begun the annual J'Cinspection of properties in French Court that had
violations during the 1993 inspections. A reinspection of each property is required one year
from the date that property'S case me is closed. TIle number of rcinspections in French Court
will become much higher in June and July as most of the property owner~ needed the allotted
ninety days for completion of the necessary repairs.
The PREP staff recently completed inspections in the second inspection area, Heninger Park.
Inspection of this area could not be completed in six months, as originally planned, due to the
number of rental properties to schedule and inspect bein& higher than anticipated. FoUowina
is a summary of the activity by the PREP staff in the Heninger Park neighborhood:
A total of 364 rental properties containing 1,804 rental units were inspected.
Notices of Violation to correct deficiencies were issued to the owners of 347 of
the 364 properties. Violations uncovered totaled 5,133 and included 2,136
immediate life-hazard "A" violations, 2,060 serious, non-life threatening "B"
violations, 697 primarily cosmetic "C. violations and 240 tenant caused
violations. Correcting of the violations required 100 building permits, 195
plumbing permits, 87 electrical permits and 28 mechanical permits for a total of
410. To date, 310 properties are in full compliance and most others are very near
'"
to cort)pletini their repairs. Ei&ht properties have gone into foreclosure or are set
for auction. Eleven case files have been referred to the City Attorney for leial
action and at least five others are being prepared for referral.
French Park was approved as the third inspection area for the PREP program on April 18, 1994.
On April 19th, letters were sent to the rental property owners requestini that they contact the
PREP office to schedule an appointment to inspect their property. As of this date, sixteen out
of 166 rental properties have been inspected. Sixty-six additional owners have either scheduled
appointments or called to state they would contact their tenants to arrange a convenient date for
an inspection. Future updates will be provided as the inspections in the French Park
neighborhood continue.
Robyn Uptegraff. Executive Director
Planning and Building Agency
cc: City Manaier
City Council
! "d
.. .. ~ i i ~
$ $ ~
C,,) ~ ~ ' ~ ~
, ,
C,,) ~ .. ..
~ en o i
U1 ~ ~
I ; :; I ~
... ~ ; ~
C,n 8 8
'#. '#. a ~
~ ~ ~
g !
(J)
~
i ~
~ ~
)'"'..~.''-':'''
'I
..'.~ , \
:11 ;
!,: _.~
.{",! ,.."
C"T .011 r::,-qn-t.~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDIIIAIICE OF THE CITY OF SAIl BERIIARDIIIO ADDIIIG SECTIOII
5.04.527 TO THE MUIIICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A RESIDEIITIAL REIITAL
SURCHARGE III THE BUSIIIESS REGISTRATIOII FEE
THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION l:
That the San Bernardino Municipal Code is
hereby amended by adding a section, to be numbered 5.04.527, which
said section reads as follows:
5.04.527
Residential Rental Surcharge.
11 The business license fee for residential'property rental and
12 residential apartment rental shall consist of the fees established
13 by Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council, plus an annual
14 surcharge for each property rental unit or each apartment rental
15 unit. The surcharge hereby established shall be due and payable
16 and shall be paid at the same time and in the same manner that the
17 fee due under section 5.04.525 is due and payable. No business
18 license shall be issued unless the surcharge is paid. Penalties
19 and interest shall be assessed upon the total amount due and
20 unpaid as specified in this chapter until such time as both amount
21 due and the surcharge due under this section are paid in full.
22 All provisions for the enforcement, collection and recovery of
23 unpaid business license fees shall likewise apply to the
24 enforcement, collection and recovery of any unpaid surcharge. The
25 amount of said surcharge shall be established by Resolution of the
26 Mayor and Common Council.
27
SECTION 2:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,
28 phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be
FLR:CMa [Resident.OrdJ
1
June 20, 1994
1
2
3
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADDING SECTION 5.04.527 TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A RESIDENTIAL SURCHARGE IN THE
BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE
invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
4 competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
5 validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City
6 Council of the City of San Bernardino hereby declares that it
7 would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection,
8 sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the
9
10
fact that
sentences,
or more sections,
anyone
subsections,
clauses,
phrases,
portions
be
declared
or
invalid or
11 unconstitutional.
12
SECTION 3:
Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor
13 the repeal hereby of any ordinance shall in any manner affect the
14 prosecution for violation of ordinances, which violations were
15 committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as
16 affecting any of the provisions of such ordinance relating to the
17 collection of any such license or penalty or the penal provision
18 applicable to any violation thereof, nor to affect the validity of
19 any bond or cash deposit in lieu thereof, required to be posted,
20 filed or deposited pursuant to any ordinance and all rights and
21 obligations thereunder appertaining shall continue in full force
22 and effect.
23 III
24 III
25 III
26 III
27 III
28 III
FLR:c~ [Resident.Ord]
2
June 20, 1994
1 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADDING SECTION 5.04.527 TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A RESIDENTIAL SURCHARGE IN THE
2 BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE
3
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing ordinance was duly
4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of
5 San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the
day of
, 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
Council Members:
AYES
NAYS
ABSTAIN
NEGRETE
CURLIN
HERNANDEZ
OBERHELMAN
DEVLIN
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
ABSENT
City Clerk
of
The foregoing ordinance is hereby approved this
, 1994.
day
Tom Minor, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
City Attorney
B~~
FLR:c.. [R..ident.OrdJ
3
June 20, 1994