apartments

apartments
[image_credit]MinnPost photo by Corey Anderson[/image_credit]
Amid this ongoing pandemic, many existing societal issues have grown into full-blown crises for our neighbors in St. Paul and across the state – from health care access and environmental degradation to wealth inequality and systemic racism. An issue inextricably tied to these is a shortage of affordable and stable housing. The housing crisis did not start with the pandemic, nor will it end as we return to some sense of “normalcy.” There is no single solution to our regional housing shortage, but we know that renters are too often on the front lines of the crisis.

Karen Allen
[image_caption]Karen Allen[/image_caption]
For all of us, home has become the most important place during this pandemic. But it is impossible to shelter at home if you lose access to your housing or are forced to find a new home with short notice, and that is a real risk for too many of our city’s renters. Renters make up half of St. Paul’s population – they are our neighbors, our friends, our teachers, nurses, and essential workers. It rings hollow to claim that “All Are Welcome Here” if any in our community are at risk of losing their homes. This threat falls especially hard on renters in communities of color and those who have been historically disadvantaged. We must ensure that our neighbors are not displaced from their neighborhoods; community stability and resiliency across St. Paul benefits us all.

Common-sense, long-overdue protections

With that goal in mind, the St. Paul City Council is currently considering a package of SAFE Tenant Protections (Stable, Accessible, Fair, and Equitable housing) that are both common-sense and long-overdue. The proposal consists of five main points:

1) a “just-cause” requirement, so that tenants cannot be forced to leave without due cause (they can still be evicted for 10 existing, legally allowed reasons);

2) provides clarified tenant screening criteria, which would eliminate some screening criteria that are shown to have little to no impact on renter reliability, but do cause a disproportionate impact on the ability of those with minor criminal offenses to get back on their feet and become stable community members;

Zack Mensinger
[image_caption]Zack Mensinger[/image_caption]
3) caps security deposits at one month’s rent, which would help increase housing accessibility for many who might not have two to three months’ rent available, but can reliably pay their monthly rent;

4) requires a 90-day notice of sale so that tenants have adequate time to find new housing (especially important given our region’s lowest-in-the-nation vacancy rates) and also gives affordable housing providers time to buy and preserve naturally occurring affordable housing when it hits the market; and

5) requires landlords to provide a tenants’ rights and responsibilities document in electronic or print form.

These tenant protections seek to increase housing stability and accessibility for St. Paul’s renter population who may be at risk of undeservedly losing the shelter they currently have or who face unnecessary burdens when finding new housing. Just as there are legal protections for those that pay a mortgage to a bank, this city ordinance provides some much-needed clarity and protection for our city’s renters.

Will create a more balanced rental market

While the SAFE Tenant Protections ordinance will require some additional actions by landlords, overall it will also help create a more balanced rental market, where expectations and requirements are clear throughout the city. No longer will the exploitative actions of some landlords (at their tenant’s expense) give them an advantage over the majority of others who are already fair and honest. Instead, these clarified rights and responsibilities for both parties will promote community stability and fair practices across Saint Paul.

If you, too, are a St. Paul resident, we encourage you to support our community by letting your council member know you support this ordinance. 

Karen Allen and Zack Mensinger are neighbors in the Hamline-Midway neighborhood of St. Paul; both are former St. Paul renters. Karen is currently a landlord; Zack is a professor at Metropolitan State University who too often sees the impacts of housing instability for his students.

WANT TO ADD YOUR VOICE?

If you’re interested in joining the discussion, add your voice to the Comment section below — or consider writing a letter or a longer-form Community Voices commentary. (For more information about Community Voices, see our Submission Guidelines.)

Join the Conversation

5 Comments

  1. I can’t seem to find the proposed ordinance anywhere online. Can someone provide a link to it?

    Of particular interest to me are the 10 legally allowed reasons. From the coverage I see that non-payment of rent and repeated late payment are included. What else?

    1. I finally found it. This is a terrible ordinance. Good thing the council is amending it.

  3. Here are a few important points I would like to make the authors and readers of this article aware of:

    This ordinance is not common sense, and not overdue. This ordinance is based on the premise that “rents have skyrocketed”. Rents have averaged a 1.8% yearly increase over the last 8 years, while property taxes on rental properties have averaged close to a 10% yearly increase for the last 5 years.

    The current eviction process in Saint Paul requires landlords to mediate with residents before having them move out. A vast majority of landlords work with their residents and do not go to eviction court. In fact, the ordinance even shows that in a given month only 0.2% of residents are evicted and 99.8% of residents were not evicted.

    Some minor recent criminal offenses this law allows include stalking and sexual attacks. Many people living in an apartment building do not want their neighbor having these type of recent criminal pasts.

    The additional requirements in this proposed ordinance will cause rents to go up and landlords to sell. This will decrease stability and accessibility for St. Paul’s renter population. This was shown in research done by the University of Washington after Seattle created a similar ordinance. https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/CityAuditor/auditreports/UWSRHSFINAL.pdf

    This proposed ordinance was drafted with zero input from the people it would impact. It is an example of how our City government develops laws with no input. There are so many ways to do this better by bringing all the stakeholders to the table to developed an ordinance.

    If you, too, are a St. Paul resident, and want to keep your apartment safe, then let your council member know to “vote no” to this proposal.

    Chad Skally, former St. Paul renter, current St. Paul resident and business owner.

  4. As a long time (two decades) St. Paul landlord, I believe that the proposed ordinance flawed. As an example, capping security deposits will work against tenants with criminal, eviction (UD), and or low credit rates backgrounds. When landlords are able to collect security deposits that reflect higher risk tenants, they are much more willing to accept tenants with less than stellar backgrounds. Over 1/4 of my tenants fall into this category and would not have been accepted otherwise. Placing a cap on security deposits will force landlords like myself to no longer even consider tenants with low credit scores, criminal and or UD backgrounds.

    This is one example of how this ordinance will backfire. I would welcome being able to provide additional input. As a black landlord and owner of 20+ units in St. Paul, I wholeheartedly believe that this ordinance will do exactly the opposite of what it is intended to do.

Leave a comment