Murder inclusion in Minneapolis

Murder inclusion in Minneapolis

Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes

So this is directly from the City of Minneapolis website where the Renter Protection Ordinance was passed unanimously by the City Council and will go into effect June 2020.  Please read, because apparently as a Landlord now I must accept a murderer, who was evicted, assaulted someone in the first degree, committed arson and robbery all in one.  Good times here in Minneapolis.  

1.  Limits on screening for criminal history cannot consider misdemeanors with dates of sentencing older than 3 years

2.  Cannot consider felonies with dates of sentencing older than 7 years cannot consider convictions for certain felonies with dates of sentencing older than 10 years, including: first-degree murder, second-degree murder, third-degree murder, first-degree manslaughter, kidnapping, first-degree criminal sexual conduct, first degree assault, first degree arson and first degree aggravated robbery. •Limits on screening for rental history

3.  Cannot consider evictions where judgment was entered three or more years from date of application

4.  Cannot consider settlements entered 1 or more years before applicant submits application

5.  Cannot consider dismissed evictions or evictions resulting in judgement for the applicantoCannot screen out for insufficient rental history oIf a landlord requires an income equal to three times the rent or higher, the landlord must allow an exception where the applicant can demonstrate a history of successful rent payment with an income less than three times the rent.

6.  Limits on screening for credit history

7.  Cannot screen based on credit score, but can consider information in credit report if it’s relevant to ability to pay rent

8.  Cannot screen out for insufficient credit history

3Reply
194 views

Most Popular Reply

Investor · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2014 · 743 posts · 927 votes
6y

As someone who has both a former felon who spent 22 years in prison for drugs and other guys who have spent some time in jail for lesser things on my construction crew and who are all very hard workers, have families, and turned their lives around-they know they can't and won't go back to those things.  Are people saying they don't/shouldn't get "any" opportunity to a second chance 7-10 years after a crime?  They obviously need housing and a job so they don't re offend.  I get the argument that landlords shouldn't be "forced" into accepting substandard applicants but where is the line?  I know this is a passionate subject

See this reply in the discussion

31 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Rental Property Investor · Northern, CA · Member since 2012 · 5k+ posts · 5k+ votes
    6y

    Wow, that's terrible. That would eliminate most of my screening criteria.  They're pretty much forcing you to accept whoever applies.  

  • Member since 2019 · 42 posts · 33 votes
    6y

    In one way, I can see where it's 'good' to open up both sides of Minneapolis to 'all' renters. All of those Opportunity Zones in N Minneapolis would suddenly be really worth the investment if all the gangbangin scum were not in such concentrated areas. On the other hand, this is pure politics and pushing the problem/crime statistics around to make it more diffuse.

    What I am most curious about, is what 'law' or whatever, that states a landlord HAS to make a vacancy known to the general public? There's no 'law' that I know of that says you have to post the rental opening to any public portal......It CAN be word-of-mouth.

    What's stopping someone from forming a 'lifestyle' club or something along the lines, where as part of the membership you DO submit to background/credit ect checks... And select landlords only do the word-of-mouth thing there?

    Something along these lines would really give the clowns on the council a kick to the head.

  • CA · Member since 2016 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    6y

    @Marcus Johnson

    Lol... I thought these laws are for California only

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Diane G.Rent control is coming next.   Scary!!!!

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Account Closed

    That's an interesting point Joe, in regards to that may move the trouble to better neighborhoods making North a profitable neighborhood for us investors.  

  • Member since 2019 · 42 posts · 33 votes
    6y

    @Marcus Johnson

    The first problem with Opportunity Zones, and why maybe to hold off is, but still watch it is (edit, wrong link, fixed it) https://therealdeal.com/miami/...

    The second reason is everytime time the bobbleheads come up with something to make investors to foot the bill for sanctuary city inflows is Orange dude COMES from Real Estate, and like him or hate him... he CRUSHED it in RE. Failed/crushed.... and failed/crushed it again and again. He KNOWS real estate, and knows that the rent caps create fraudulent market values.

    Right after the idiots on the council copied/followed in lockstep with California and NY concerning rent caps, THIS news leaked https://www.housingwire.com/ar...  (lol, and the council 'paused' the timeline for rentcaps, right after this leaked). Follow the timeline... they bumble around... he waits, and counters it.

    When Mills says 
    “This is absolutely going to happen,” Mills said. “It’s just a matter of
    the scale and timing. The lesson I’ve had through observing the Trump
    administration is: They tell you in advance what they are going to do
    and they more often than not follow through.”

    ah.... there's truth in that.

  • Realtor · Minneapolis · Member since 2018 · 35 posts · 39 votes
    6y

    While these new ordinances will make blanket screening more difficult, they won't really have an impact on the majority of people.

    For example, someone who was convicted of a felony 7 years - what are the odds that they have been a perfect citizen for the past 7 years? Isn't it more likely that there will be patterns of criminal activity? 7 yrs ago a felony, a misdemeanor 3 years ago, an eviction 2years ago, etc.?

    And if a person was convicted of a felony 7+ years ago and has been a perfect citizen since then, isn't that someone you'd want to have as a tenant? They clearly have turned their life around.

    The tricky one is the credit score, which is something that is becoming harder and harder to relay on as more people have debt.

    And besides all of this, a good management company will have other ways to screen tenants besides these extremely basic ones so really only poor managers will struggle.

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Josh Brook

    The answer to your question if someone was convicted of 1st degree murder, assault or Arson, but haven't committed a crime for the past 7 years.   The answer is heck no, I don't want a murderer or Arson residing in my rental properties.  

  • Realtor · Minneapolis · Member since 2018 · 35 posts · 39 votes
    6y

    @Marcus Johnson I'm afraid you missed my point. You most likely will not have to accept that person as there is an incredibly high correlation of a repeat offense after a first one. There's lots of data on this so I won't bother sharing it here.

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Josh Brook

    And your missing my point, because the fact that a Murderer no matter when it happened and they had been convicted of it, I don't agree with the City Council that I am forced at gun point to accept a murderer should they apply.  Obviously I will abide by the ordinance as I've always done, but it's completely stupid.  

  • Joe SplitrockPro Member
    Moderator
    Rental Property Investor · Sioux Falls, SD · Member since 2015 · 9k+ posts · 18k+ votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @Marcus Johnson:

    @Josh Brook

    The answer to your question if someone was convicted of 1st degree murder, assault or Arson, but haven't committed a crime for the past 7 years.   The answer is heck no, I don't want a murderer or Arson residing in my rental properties.  

     The reason they have not committed a crime in the last 7 years is because they were in jail.

    With the size of the St. Paul / Minneapolis metro area, there is plenty of better places to invest. With property values high, now is a good time to dump your properties in Minneapolis and find a landlord friendly area to invest. 

  • JD MartinBusiness Member
    Moderator
    Rock Star Extraordinaire · Northeast, TN · Member since 2015 · 10k+ posts · 16k+ votes
    6y

    Luckily smokers and obnoxious people are not protected classes, so you still have some criteria. 

    Overall what they've done is a road of good intentions that will lead to hell for renters, because the net effect of that will be to increase rents as landlords hedge their bets against undesirable people. And if they do rent control to control that, there will be a lot of properties that simply get sold as owner-occupant property and will therefore be removed from the market altogether, creating a serious housing shortage. Or creating a precipitous drop in RE prices if the market gets flooded. 

    Rather than this type of policy, they would have better success with an incentives-based policy that gave landlords something that wanted to take a shot on these people. There's going to be few that are interested, unless they own property in a war zone anyway, so that might have been effective. Or at least worth trying. Sticks with no carrots is a very bad approach. 

    Skyline Properties
    View Page
  • Investor · Minneapolis, MN · Member since 2014 · 743 posts · 927 votes
    6y

    As someone who has both a former felon who spent 22 years in prison for drugs and other guys who have spent some time in jail for lesser things on my construction crew and who are all very hard workers, have families, and turned their lives around-they know they can't and won't go back to those things.  Are people saying they don't/shouldn't get "any" opportunity to a second chance 7-10 years after a crime?  They obviously need housing and a job so they don't re offend.  I get the argument that landlords shouldn't be "forced" into accepting substandard applicants but where is the line?  I know this is a passionate subject

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Joe Splitrock

    That is an excellent point you made regarding why somebody may not have murdered in the past seven years is because they were in jail serving time.  I just looked it up, if someone commits first-degree murder there is a minimum 30 years in prison.

  • Joe SplitrockPro Member
    Moderator
    Rental Property Investor · Sioux Falls, SD · Member since 2015 · 9k+ posts · 18k+ votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @Marcus Johnson:

    @Joe Splitrock

    That is an excellent point you made regarding why somebody may not have murdered in the past seven years is because they were in jail serving time.  I just looked it up, if someone commits first-degree murder there is a minimum 30 years in prison.

     I would worry less about murder and more about other things on that list. Again, why bother with Minneapolis? You are just looking at more restrictions and rent controls in the future. Find a good suburb and invest there.

  • Investor · Saint Paul, MN · Member since 2015 · 663 posts · 512 votes
    6y

    @Joe Splitrock

    Yes that is always an option to sell. I’ve got another property I’m trying to sell right now so that’s not even on my radar.  My duplex in South Minneapolis has been performing quite well, so for now I’m going to stay in this position.  

  • Member since 2019 · 42 posts · 33 votes
    6y
    The thing is, most background checks will usually start getting sketchy after 7 years with accuracy... or really anything pre 1998.. And if the last offense was that long ago.... eh. They're not that bad of a person, and seem to be conforming to regular society. I 'think' (there was talk of it) that the way the council worked this out was 7 years from the full time of conviction being served, meaning they are not on parole or anything either now.

    'Some' of this from the council relates to people that are picked up on minor drug offenses. Think: the fiasco this last summer downtown on Hennepin Ave, where they did a bunch of controlled buys, after complaints of violence, attacks, drug dealing/use in the open.

    The only people swept up in it were African Americans. Somehow, the council said this was racist.... but ya know.... I challenge anyone to go downtown when it's warm during the day, anywhere on Hennepin from 5th to 12th, and tell me 'who' the only people are, that walk up to you (you, a complete stranger) and offer a felony amount of narcotics for sale.

    What is 'new' is they just got rid of https://kstp.com/news/top-publ...   the main gov cheerleader/force of 'if they're too stupid to follow basic rules/ laws, let's just keep lowering the bar for civic engagement/personal responsibility and give them a pass'. Maybe there will be fresher convictions now to weed out people that pollute society.

    The only positive side of all of this is.... People living in s Mpls 'actually' will report crime, and not only that, carry through and identify 'whoever' it was that did the crime, and try to help the cops bust them.... as opposed to the SH*T show north is, where 'no one saw/knows' nothing and that self-cleaning oven just keeps doin' its thing.




  • Member since 2019 · 295 posts · 159 votes
    6y

    @Marcus Johnson. You still get to choose the person who you rent to.. why is this always a big deal just take their application and if they don’t fit pick someone else honestly you get all their info and just choose someone else.

  • Realtor · Minneapolis · Member since 2018 · 35 posts · 39 votes
    6y
    That's still not a problem, because you can turn them down for insufficient income as it's pretty hard for someone who's been in prison for years to get a job.

    Originally posted by @Marcus Johnson:

    @Joe Splitrock

    That is an excellent point you made regarding why somebody may not have murdered in the past seven years is because they were in jail serving time.  I just looked it up, if someone commits first-degree murder there is a minimum 30 years in prison.

  • Rental Property Investor · The Vampire State · Member since 2013 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @Bruce Runn:

    As someone who has both a former felon who spent 22 years in prison for drugs and other guys who have spent some time in jail for lesser things on my construction crew and who are all very hard workers, have families, and turned their lives around-they know they can't and won't go back to those things.  Are people saying they don't/shouldn't get "any" opportunity to a second chance 7-10 years after a crime?  They obviously need housing and a job so they don't re offend.  I get the argument that landlords shouldn't be "forced" into accepting substandard applicants but where is the line?  I know this is a passionate subject

    I think the issue is the business owner (landlord) should be free to assess the risk themselves on an individual basis.  For every "reformed felon" on your construction crew, there are several others that represent a significant business and liability risk to the landlord (and frankly, the public at large).  The landlord, whom must now shelter these pieces of human garbage, and endanger their other law-abiding tenants and their families by putting these felons in their midst.  These are the same tenants that will no doubt hold the property owner legally responsible for housing this felon if he does indeed return to crime.

    I want the FREEDOM to choose whom I "take a chance on" as a tenant if I am putting my business livelihood at risk.

  • Member since 2019 · 42 posts · 33 votes
    6y

    @Josh Brook There are quite a few people, licensed in real estate that have a felony. And most employers can't even ask if you are a felon anymore, unless it's expected there will be a background report conducted to be able to 'perform' the job. Many of the people that were mentioned at the '7' year mark..... will have pretty okay credit, when they are released. At the 7 year mark much of the delinquency, if it exists on credit, will fall off due to the statute of limitations on recovering charged off debt. Even before they are sued in absence, going for a default judgement to lock it in, there's a ticking clock on the judgement for recovery.

    Not all felons are repeaters. Over here they are saying https://www.jec.senate.gov/pub... "In 2016, 110 million Americans had an arrest record with police authorities.That is over twice as many people as in 1997 (when the total was 54 million) and works out to 44 percent of our adult population".... Many made a bad choice, lived the consequences, and said 'I'm not going back' and went on living life.

    When they are released from prison, and with okay credit... and with most employers not being able to check criminal background without a good reason in MN... That's where their decision making comes into play.... are they reformed or not. Credit/background checks will say a lot... The last felony could be 4 years ago....are they still having scrapes with the law? Misdemeanor's MATTER, as a felony can be pled down to a lesser charge. A credit check matters... have they acquired more debt in a collections state? Is there a total disregard for financial obligation? Those things matter, and a landlord should be able to check. The fundamentals of 'Capitalism', the first paragraph over here  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...is what the council is eroding. An investor ie capitalist should have the ability to gauge the market, and be able to make decisions for their own business.

  • Realtor · Minneapolis · Member since 2018 · 35 posts · 39 votes
    6y

    @Account Closed I agree with all your points! Especially that all people who commit felonies are not "felons".

    I also agree that the council is putting in place laws that will be ineffective. They certainly won't help tenants the way the council thinks. However, I don't think it will have a huge impact on management companies. When it became apparent that the screening ordinances were going to pass, the management company I run began to change our policies accordingly to test out the impact it would have and it was very minimal. We weren't forced to accept the first tenant that applied and our buildings aren't filled with murders and rapists.

    If we're arguing political and economic theory, I'm absolutely with you, but if we're talking about the intense rhetoric that states that investors are doomed, I simply disagree. Good managers will still be able to find good tenants.

  • Rental Property Investor · Los Angeles, CA · Member since 2017 · 2k+ posts · 5k+ votes
    6y
    Originally posted by @Marcus Johnson:

    @Diane G.Rent control is coming next.   Scary!!!!

    How long until the local government sets up a system where you are required to submit your vacancy to them and they assign a renter to your unit? 

    Think that is crazy paranoia that could never happen? Just look at the insanity of what has happened and is proposed along the coasts. I'd have thought you were bat **** crazy if just 5 years ago you told me some of the policies that would be here today. 

  • Member since 2019 · 42 posts · 33 votes
    6y

    @Josh Brook

    Good to hear that it's not having that much of an impact for you. The 'Good managers will still be able to find good tenants' is where I'd like to see where it's all going.

    It'd be a boon for more local investors to find ways to tap into this -

    'The vast majority of the money in the housing proposal unveiled Thursday, up to $200 million, would be awarded to developers to construct or renovate affordable housing and permanent housing and services for the homeless. An additional $60 million would be earmarked for public housing complexes'


    http://www.startribune.com/wal...

    I'm not a fan of Walz, but that's a pile of opportunity

  • Investor · Las Vegas, NV · Member since 2013 · 8k+ posts · 10k+ votes
    6y

    “2. Cannot consider felonies with dates of sentencing older than 7 years cannot consider convictions for certain felonies with dates of sentencing older than 10 years, including: first-degree murder, second-degree murder, third-degree murder, first-degree manslaughter, kidnapping, first-degree criminal sexual conduct, first degree assault, first degree arson and first degree aggravated robbery. ”

    How do these dates even make sense? Are the time limits are from sentencing date. So if the murder gets 10 years in prison you have to rent to them the day they get out? 

    Who do you think is going to get sued if you let a murderer or child molester rent from you and they harm a neighbor? I guarantee it won’t be the city. 

    Ps. Definition of Sentencing date. Sentencing date ' means the date on which the sentence is imposed by the court upon conviction.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.