Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

A violation of civil rights

August 23, 2013

It's time for all local landlords to take a stand against what has been a farce as Jeff Bower stated in his letter to the editor....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(21)

WeThePeople

Aug-23-13 4:57 AM

I believe if you are a local landlord you should be able to see for yourself if there is any suspicious activity going on within a 24 hr period then you can report it to police and maybe we can catch some of these criminals who are staying in rental units illegally and THAT would cut down on crime in our city.

Then you have slum lords who do not live locally and could care less what goes on in their rental units, as long as they get their money, they rent to anyone.

I live right by one of those slum lord rentals it has 3 units, and have called the police several times about suspicious activity, and people have been arrested and the tenants move every few months so there is someone new all the time.

One of the units is for rent right now, it will be rented very soon I'm sure. I tried to talk to the owner of the rental unit he is from NJ but he would not even talk to me. JMHO

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

streetmachine

Aug-23-13 6:56 AM

we have no civil rights anymore

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Aug-23-13 7:10 AM

We have slumlords who live locally. We have good and bad landlords everywhere. The best idea would be placing the ordinance as a ballot issue and let the city residents decide. (anyone know if we can place proposed ordinances on a ballot?). Finally, landlords need to take a stand? i think not. We, the people of Williamsport, want to know exactly how you conduct your business. BTW, I am a landlord too.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Aug-23-13 7:14 AM

I don't live in Wmspt. so I'd like to ask a question. Do city residents pay an occup. tax? If so, maybe they are pushing this issue just to collect names and send out tax bills. Just an idea.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Aug-23-13 7:32 AM

I asked this before, where is the data from cities such as Berwick that already have this ordinance in place? Is this ordinance in fact doing what it's designed to do? I'm hearing a lot from the administration about what they hope it will accomplish, but why aren't we hearing the positive results from areas that have it in place? This is, no doubt, going to cost tax payers money to enforce, and I think we should be afforded all the information before it's put in place.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DumberThanSome

Aug-23-13 7:51 AM

In my neighborhood there are about 12 houses out of them there are nine homeowners and three rentals. One rental is a double on one side people in and out all the time and police are there at times. The other side people just moved in two weeks ago. They were there one week and they have a party and about 2am I'm awakened by them fighting and yelling in the street. The police came and quelled it. The next time I;m awakened in the middle of the night I'm going to call the landlord and wake him. We will see how he likes being woke up in the middle of the night. I support this ordinance and hope more municipalities follow suit.

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Aug-23-13 7:59 AM

Dumberthansome (Smarterthansome), great idea. Call the landlord. Share the pain.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Aug-23-13 8:10 AM

"So again, I ask the taxpayers of our city, what is this new ordinance really about?"

++

I believe that it was because the last census numbers were apparently low and not representative of the number of people that live in the city. This ordinance was an attempt to boost the head count so that they could get more matching tax funds from the federal government.

I think that landlords ought to put surveillance cameras in every house to monitor the activities of the tenants remotely; one at the front door, one in the kitchen and one in the living room.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Aug-23-13 8:28 AM

I think that landlords ought to put surveillance cameras in every house to monitor the activities of the tenants remotely; one at the front door, one in the kitchen and one in the living room. -Texas

I really hope you are being sarcastic. I don't even want to start explaining how many rights this would violate. I'm on the fence regarding this proposal because I think a lot of information is not being provided and that often has me leery. However, I do think a lot of landlords need to take a more active role in property management. I'm not a landlord, but if I was I darn sure would make sure I did everything possible to protect my investment. That's just sound business practices. I have no idea why some choose not to do so.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

USABorn

Aug-23-13 8:45 AM

streetmachine - 6:56 AM

"we have no civil rights anymore"

How is this proposed law a violatiom of CIVIL rights?

Why is it that when someone disagrees with a law, it is a violation of his/her civil rights? It certainly is abused terminology!

DEFINITION: Rights to personal liberty established by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. constitution and certain Congressional acts, especially as applied to an individual or a minority group.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Aug-23-13 9:02 AM

I believe that it was because the last census numbers were apparently low and not representative of the number of people that live in the city. This ordinance was an attempt to boost the head count so that they could get more matching tax funds from the federal government. -Texas

I also heard this from the Mayor. However, can results from city ordinances really trump the outcome of a federal government census? Were other communities that have this ordinance, such as Berwick successful in doing just that? Like I said, I think there is too much not being said and I find it hard to believe that the mayor is not looking at results from others communities.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Aug-23-13 9:19 AM

"And I think it's high time that landlords be held accountable for who they rent to."

Francine, I totally agree. I just question if this ordinance is the right tool to make that happen. That's why I would like to see more data from other communities that have it. If it's already been proven ineffective and difficult to enforce, then why have it and hire additional manpower to try and enforce it?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Aug-23-13 9:45 AM

Francine,"And I think it's high time that landlords be held accountable for who they rent to."

What happens the first time a landlord refused to rent to someone, based on a suspicion that this person might be a criminal? The cry will go out of discrimination and profiling. Then what happens when a criminal is found to be living in a home but is not registered, because the landlord doesn't know. Will the landlord be held accountable. Yes they will, because the landlord is the only person who can be held accountable. From what I've seen, this is a lose/lose for the landlords and will do little or nothing to help law enforcement. I haven't looked close enough to be able to say if this is unconstitutional, but it's not a good idea.

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

underwood

Aug-23-13 10:13 AM

Let’s not forget that landlords are subject to laws and regulations against discrimination. I’m sure the thought of getting sued or otherwise pressured has a lot to do with who gets rentals.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Aug-23-13 10:18 AM

To be honest, I think this is Gabe's attempt at driving out the "slum lords". The problem is he couldn't think of any legal way to target just the problem landlords, so he's attempting to do it with this ordinance. In doing so, he is also sweeping the many good landlords into his net. Kinda sounds like Gabe should think about a future career with the NSA. Is there a problem, yes, but prove to those that are law abiding tenants and landlords that this ordinance is a proven tool to eliminate that problem and maybe they will compromise. He has offered no proof.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Aug-23-13 11:10 AM

Remember your buddy MrShaman wrote this the other day ""Immorality" is a relative-concept."-Bobbie2 I have seen this quote being kicked around as of late, Would somebody please explain what is false regarding this statement, and please try to be a little more adult than to point to its author on these boards.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Aug-23-13 5:22 PM

Scott, Immorality is a word with a real meaning. As such it is not relative. Standards of morality vary between societal groups, which would make it relative in a manner of speaking. What most people mean when they say that morality is relative is that each person gets to decide for themselves what is moral and what is not. That is incorrect and only the most self centered people believe it. You do get to have your own ideas of right and wrong, but you do not get to decide morals. Society gets to do that. In reality, it is God who has the final word and He has given it to us. A lot of people don't agree with that, but they will find out in the end.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

streetmachine

Aug-23-13 5:42 PM

it is a game the mayor is playing to get more revnue for the city

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

streetmachine

Aug-23-13 5:43 PM

the more people he can show that lives here is more money in the city pocket

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scott36

Aug-23-13 9:10 PM

You do get to have your own ideas of right and wrong, but you do not get to decide morals. Society gets to do that.-enigma Who's society??? What makes you think you are so far above anybody else??? There are societies that believe that strapping bombs on their children and having them blow up perfect strangers is just & moral. I would beg to differ with them, but the fact still remains that to them it is moral(from their disgusting way of being manipulated-IMO) So morality is a relative concept---relative to different beliefs.

"What most people mean when they say that morality is relative is that each person gets to decide for themselves what is moral and what is not.That is incorrect and only the most self centered people believe it."-enigma WHO makes YOUR decisions? I believe you are attempting to say that some people try to justify things to themselves. That is different. I make my decisions from my religious teachings. But it is MY decision, not anybody else's.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Aug-25-13 2:03 PM

Capricorn1,

On the camera issue, yes, I was spoofing.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 21 of 21 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web