IRETON’S OVERT HOSTILITY TO LANDLORDS IS MISGUIDED – PART TWO

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.