In reaction to the public comment remarks made by landlord Stu Leer at this week’s meeting of the Salisbury City Council, Mayor Ireton has posted on the City’s website lists of what he describes as “code compliance violations” and “calls for [police] service” at rental properties owned and operated by Mr. Leer or the firm in which he is an owner. Ireton’s descriptions are highly misleading; many of the listed items are designated as “closed” without any action and others do not specify any violation. Some of the items actually occurred before the property was owned by Mr. Leer or his firm. Mr. Ireton has simply compiled lists of every matter, including many still “under investigation,” that specify the address of a rental property owned by Mr. Leer or his firm and falsely described them all as code violations or crime.
The lists do not indicate who made the calls or reported the incidents. Mr. Leer believes that in many instances the initiator was either him or one of the tenants. He has urged his tenants to report criminal conduct or suspicious activity to the police – the “neighborhood watch” concept – and many of the items are designated “suspicion.”
This latest action by Ireton is obviously intended by him to support his assertion that “the rental industry must police their own” because “the City cannot continue to be involved in the relationship between tenant and landlord.” Those statements reflect either Ireton’s utter ignorance or, much more troublesome, his unwillingness to cooperate with landlords to address and resolve to the greatest possible extent the problems that plague neighborhoods in which there is significant rental occupancy.
The notion that landlords can “police” one another without governmental involvement is both fatuous and bad public policy. Only the City can enforce its codes and criminal laws. If a working relationship existed between the “rental industry” and City officials, the task of the City would be much more effective and efficient for the benefit of all residents and property owners. SAPOA, a group of landlords, approached Mr. Ireton soon after he was elected and has submitted a proposed plan (“Memorandum of Understanding”) for his consideration.
To date, Ireton has failed to discuss the matter with SAPOA. Instead, he has attacked and vilified a landlord who is a prime mover in its effort to build rapport with the City and threatened that if the “rental industry” does not “police their own,” the City will do so. That attitude may be the basis for Ireton’s attempt “Slum Property of the Week” and the addition of another property inspector to be funded by increased fees for rental registration. Even if another inspector is needed, Ireton’s attitude may soon put the City on a slippery slope (if it’s not already) in which the cost to the City of policing rental property increases as its effectiveness decreases.
As we have observed, why Ireton does not respond in a positive manner to the landlords’ attempt to interface with the City is perplexing. He has offered various reasons, including that he is “too busy,” and castigated Mr. Leer. For whatever reason, Ireton seems to be incapable of coming together with those whom he has often reviled as irresponsible or worse to find common ground on which to form a relationship. As mentioned above, his reaction to recent commentary about the situation by Mr. Leer and another SAPOA member has been to attack Mr. Leer.
The truly astounding aspect of the situation is that SAPOA’s position has undergone a major shift from its former opposition to any regulation by the City to offering to facilitate that function, but Ireton is unwilling to consider any relationship for that purpose. It seems that, having built his political base by railing against the “rental industry” he cannot bring himself to engage with it.
How Ireton’s conduct, if continued, can avoid moving the City onto and down the slippery slope is hard to imagine, and that result may soon become difficult or impossible to reverse. The intervention of an impartial mediator could be the last best hope to achieve an appropriate relationship between the City and the rental industry.
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
11 comments:
Oh, please. Leer and Ireton are both pouring gas on the fire, not to mention new SAPOA president Adams. For instance, at Monday night's meeting no one mentioned SAPOA until Adams stood up and launched her little diatribe about SAPOA. The truth is that SAPOA has asserted that it can police its own for about 20 years. Where has that gotten the city with rental housing? Just take a look around. Anyone who lives or works in Salisbury knows that SAPOA has been unsuccessful and the problems associated with poorly maintained rental properties continue to grow. That is not to say that all landlords maintain less than desirable properties, that is far from true. However, SAPOA is a lobbyist group tat wants as little regulation of the industry as possible, regardless of the harm that lack of regulation brings to surrounding neighborhoods.
You've acknowledged in this post that SAPOA has suddenly made a "major shift." Well, you may trust them, but I don't. As for Ms. Adams, ask her what her activities were in the last election. And Mr Leer was driving a bunch of his tenants to the voting booths all day long. You think he did that out of a good public spirit?
Annon 11:17 I dont trust Leer and Adams. Been there first hand to witness their actions. These people don't change overnight unless they are on their death bed begging forgiveness.
Above commentators:
Right on, let's never try a truce and keep fighting (with taxpayers' money) forever so Paul Wilber can retire a multi-millionaire and maybe become a Salisbury landlord, too in his golden years.
Please pass the Kool-Aid, bozos, and don't drink it all.
If you missed it, read Bob Caldwell's letter at
http://sbynews.blogspot.com/2010/05/mayor-ireton-now-hear-this.html
What a shame he was not elected mayor last year.
And don't miss the main post, below, on Mr. Leer's response to Ireton's charges.
Jim-beau ain't lookin' very good!
The only thing I will say that comes close to defending the landlords is that the city should have to adhere to the same building code standards.Aside from that,I have no empathy for the landlords or any of their cronies.They have been partially responsible for the decline in city neighborhoods.
blutojthetotmom, Blame, You think!
What "major shift"? All we've heard is podium theatrics from these landlords. Ireton posts Slum of the Week and all of a sudden these landlords care about crime in the city?
As John Stossel would say:
Gimme A Break!
Not that I think Ireton is exactly right. He becomes more of a buffoon every day. Just because he's being stupid too doesn't mean we should believe the landlords have had a "major shift."
salisbury has become a sh@thole and the reason is the slumlords!
At least half of Salisbury is a slum. It is because the past administrations have catered to the landlords and made it profitable to buy low dollar properties with little or no regulations regarding renting them out. The majority of Salisbury is made up of areas where I doubt you would be brave enough to walk at night. If Mr. Leer is so proud of his properties then we need a list of his properties so we can see for ourselves.
Post a Comment