Toledo Lead Paint Law...Halted for the THIRD Time

Andrew Fidler · 2020-06-27T04:27:35-07:00

https://www.toledoblade.com/local/city/2020/06/26/kapszukiewicz-administration-delays-lead-safe-housing-enforcement-citing-coronavirus/stories/20200626079The latest and greatest on the Toledo Lead Ordinance. The 2019 declaration of a new lead ordinance which would be enforced by Toledo's Dept of Neighborhoods (not the County Health Dept as the ~2016 version was going to be) has been officially ended. The deadline for compliance was at the end of this month but there hadn't been any publicity, publication, or out reach. Check the BP archives back in February 2020 I requested a lead certification for a property and was blatantly told by our Dept of Neighborhoods that there was no certificate, process for inspection, nor staff on hand forming any department as of yet.What Does Andrew Think? The City will begin discussion late this year and there is a possibility they will have the momentum to get it right this time. I know the topic is largely political so factor our mayor is up for election in 2021 so the program's future will rest on the goodwill generated through the program.I hope any program affects ALL rental properties not units 1-4 in size (children are exposed to lead in all properties not just small ones) followed by ALL HOMES (children are exposed where lead is present - old homes - not just landlord rented ones). I hope they simplify the process for visual peeling paint as the initial inspection and get away from the expense and hassle of wipe tests. I will continue to provide a voice for property managers and investors in Toledo to make a lead program successful. I do think a program is coming, it's just a matter of time for Toledo to get the traction to put a program into place and begin friendly education and grant programs followed by firm language and eventual fines and enforcement. I see a lead paint program as a necessity to force landlords to update their properties, many owners will have to decide if they will re-paint or install vinyl siding/windows or dump their properties to new owners who will. (My personal portfolio has been aggressively installing vinyl siding, soffit, fascia, and using waterproof laminate flooring over any painted ones. Whenever the lead ordinance occurs I won't have an uphill battle, nor will I have reporters documenting blighted properties I am responsible for)Conclusion - whenever a lead ordinance finally does come into effect and age through to enforcement Toledo real estate will suffer in the most difficult neighborhoods. Those of us who see that as a buying opportunity will displace those who are a hazard to our community and the public AND the new owners will benefit.In the mean time hunker down as Covid spikes again and remember the communicating on Bigger Pockets and with your favorite Toledo property manager are safe ways to develop your real estate skills while staying safe!(Please post if anyone has an update on Cleveland/Akron/Columbus/Cincinnati lead paint program ordinances, I'd be curious if we have a state-wide delay)

Andrew FidlerBusiness Member

OP

Real Estate Broker · Toledo, OH · Member since 2011 · 384 posts · 434 votes

4y

https://www.toledoblade.com/lo...

Well, if the Toledo market hasn't had enough of two prior ordinances and one faceplant in court, we have yet another twist with the Toledo Lead Safe Ordinance.

As stated above, Toledo leadership decided on June 1st to make a newscast declaring that the 2020 lead ordinance deadline of June 30, 2022 was unchanged after Covid and 18 months of inaction from the city and threatened a $10,000 fine for failure to comply by the deadline looming 30 days away.

Well, today we have an article announcing a lawsuit has again been filed against the city, and it must be pretty damning because the city has immediately announced they will not enforce their deadline until August 1st (30 day reprieve).

According to the news article today, we are being told the lead ordinance is still alive and well but enforcement simply isn't going into effect for a while.

What am I personally doing? I'm getting my properties inspected. It's not a real financial crisis unless you have peeling paint everywhere. I've seen this coming for close to a decade, so my portfolio contains a minimum of painted exteriors, painted soffits, original windows, etc. and we’ve been renovating accordingly (vinyl siding, etc).

What remains clear is that the ordinance isn’t going away, even though implementation deadlines are presently fluctuating. The lawsuit will hopefully help fix some of the administrative problems with the ordinance’s implementation… but the ordinance is here to stay and will need to be complied with.

I am most curious how this will affect our lower-end neighborhoods: houses with peeling wood siding and soffit/fascia. These properties have always been challenging, but curious how things will proceed with purchasers knowing that a $30k investment is required on a $20k house. I am seeing prompt compliance within the higher-value areas of Phase 1, and some foot dragging in the poorer areas. The true purpose of the ordinance won't be realized until those property owners who avoid or refuse compliance are challenged to comply.

At the end of the day, having Lead Safe properties improves and preserves the health of our community's children. In my opinion, those who maintain their properties are the same ones who read the news and comply as ordinances occur. We won't have a comprehensive improvement in our children's health, nor the quality of our most challenged neighborhoods, until the ordinance moves beyond those who have now complied through several iterations. Once the ordinance can finally hold our "Catch-22 Housing Providers" accountable we will see a change in the housing stock, rent rate, and the ultimate goal, the lead blood level of the city's children.

(Catch-22 is described in prior posts...it's a $400 property in a $750 neighborhood where the family is living in unsafe or unsanitary conditions and cannot afford to exercise their right to complain or move. If someone like LaPlante Real Estate takes the property over, $40k in repair will be conducted and the property will promptly rent for $795 potentially forcing the family out. Ultimately the elimination of Catch-22 properties is the goal of the ordinance but will result in higher rent rates, increased property values, and forcing more families onto rental assistance.)

[email protected]419-410-3836

LaPlante Real Estate

Website View Page

3 Reply

Andrew FidlerBusiness Member

OP

Real Estate Broker · Toledo, OH · Member since 2011 · 384 posts · 434 votes

4y

Text of the article for those of us who have no interest in paying the Toledo Blade for access...

https://www.toledoblade.com/lo...

A civil lawsuit seeking to block Toledo’s lead ordinance has forced the city to push back its deadline for residential properties to be certified as lead safe as landlords face the potential of $10,000 fines.

After a similar 2016 ordinance was struck down by the court system, Mayor Wade Kapszukiewicz worked with city council to craft an updated version of the Toledo Lead Ordinance, which then passed in December, 2020.

The ordinance requires that owners of 1-4-unit residential rental properties or family childcare homes built before 1978 have their property inspected and certified lead-safe, as well as register their property with the county auditor. Inspections must be completed by a local lead inspector who visually inspects the interior and exterior of the property and collects dust wipes to ensure it’s up to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards.

The lawsuit was filed Monday in Lucas County Common Pleas Court.

The city has agreed to not enforce the lead paint ordinance until Aug. 1 after the original deadline to get certified and register properties with the Lucas County auditor was June 30. The ordinance would apply to about 6,000 Toledo properties.

Gretchen DeBacker, the city’s director of marketing and communications, said that the city is still actively working to resolve the issues that have been raised in the complaint.

“The parties have agreed to meet and try to resolve issues that are potentially outstanding in the plaintiff’s claim and trying to avoid any protracted litigation,” she said.

Ms. DeBacker added that even with the deadline, the ordinance “is going to be implemented.”

“Residents and landlords are encouraged to still take steps to ensure that their properties are lead safe and begin the process,” she said.

Judge Gary Cook of Lucas County Court of Common Pleas signed a consent order on Tuesday confirming the deadline extension. The plaintiff, listed as Charmarlyn Strong of Toledo, has agreed not to pursue a temporary restraining order hearing.

Her representation, Perrysburg-based attorney Andrew Mayle, said that he does not believe that the ordinance should be enforced at all, but that the parties agreed that the lawsuit does not need “immediate attention from the court” if the ordinance is not enforced.

Mr. Mayle said that the lawsuit was filed in an effort to bring issues forward before enforcement of the ordinance began.

“We could have sat back and just not complied and waited for them to try to cite somebody and raise this then, but we didn’t think that was the right way to go about it,” Mr. Mayle said. “We just wanted to be upfront. We asked the city to fix it themselves, they did not, so we filed our lawsuit.”

The city and the Toledo-Lucas County Board of Health are the listed defendants.

Along with the complaint Mr. Mayle included a letter from himself to Toledo law director Dale Emch dated for June 21. It asks the city to “restrain the abuse of Toledo’s corporate powers.”

The letter goes on to list three primary issues being alleged with the ordinance: there is no “coherent” penalty for violations, it assumes the health department has “statutory powers” that it does not, and that it offends the “exclusive jurisdiction” of the Toledo Municipal Court. Mr. Mayle called the ordinance a case of “legislative malpractice”.

“If this is truly a public health issue, why are most residences being left out? Why are owner-occupied [units] being left out? Why are big apartment units being left out?” he said. “We think if they’re going to do this to be a level playing field, just make everyone play by the same rules.”

Although there is only one plaintiff listed in the complaint, Mr. Mayle said that the ordinance would likely impact “hundreds or thousands” of property owners, should it go into effect.

Those who don’t comply could be subject to fines of up to $10,000 per unit, according to the ordinance. Mr. Mayle’s letter argues that individuals cannot be in violation of section of the code in question because it “merely describes the process for obtaining a so-called ‘Lead-Safe Certificate.’”

The letter also argues that the health department does not have the ability to issue such a certificate, because it is a “creature of statute with limited enumerated powers.”

The initial deadline only applies to properties in the most at-risk census tracts. According to the ordinance, deadlines are set for units in various tracts on June 30 and Dec. 31 for every year until the end of 2026.

According to Judge Cook’s order, parties must update the court on the status of the issue by late July.

[email protected]419-410-3836

LaPlante Real Estate

Website View Page

2 Reply

Renee F.

Real Estate Investor · Dallas, NC · Member since 2016 · 43 posts · 10 votes

4y

It's about time this issue is brought to light! This is exactly what I have complained about on here (along with many others)! It seems as though some of those bigger apartment buildings are in just as much disrepair and need this ordinance to get those landlords to clean up their property. I have wondered why they were just targeting the smaller buildings or houses. Not everybody is making a huge profit on their rentals! I am just glad to have someone renting my house at a reasonable amount and they are good people who take care of my home!

4 Reply

Michael Temple

Rental Property Investor · Toledo, OH · Member since 2017 · 257 posts · 215 votes

4y

I am with @Andrew Fidler and I don't think this is going away. The optics of the situation and its effect on politicians to now back off of this after all the rhetoric they whipped up is impossible. I believe the courts will eventually side with the city, BUT the question at hand is what does this look like after all that comes down. I have said all along if the city wants a law like this then EVERYBODY goes into the pot. Apartments, homeowners, etc. Not just one small select group of property owners. I have personally had issues with houses I was working on where the property next door had peeling paint but because they were an owner occupant they didn't have to address the issue. My property would have paint blowing into the yard that I had to clean up. If someone in my property were to have lead poisoning and the health department were called in I would be the only one under the microscope. The peeling paint coming off the neighbor's house wouldn't even be a factor in the investigation, discussion, and the lawsuits that would follow even if it was pointed out this could be the source of the problem. Therefore the only way to be fair is EVERYONE must comply or nobody.

I am all for improving housing, but not as an unfunded mandate that is thrown against only one group of property owners while ignoring all the other types of property owners (apartments & owner-occupants) and factors (lead pipes still in city water lines) that could go into the lead problem. Either we have an honest discussion about the problem as a whole and EVERYONE contributes to the solution or we let things stay as they are until EVERYONE is ready to be involved. Housing providers didn't create this problem over night by themselves. This has been a long time coming and it needs to be a community solution with every property involved, an efficient and effective inspection system that is fair, and most importantly A LOT of money to help property owners become compliant without bankrupting them. It is that last piece that will be the most problematic. Government is great at issuing mandates and fines to enforce, but not quite so good at providing funding to help with those mandates.

Andrew brings up another good point about the unintended consequences of this law if it is allowed to stand exactly as it is right now. This law was modeled after Rochester New York, where today the blighted housing stock stands at 35% and rising. Property owners have simply thrown up their hands and walked away and now you have a decreased supply of rentals and an increase in blighted and abandoned properties that are turning into eye sores and problems. That will likely happen in Toledo because as Andrew pointed out, putting in a $30K investment into a $20K house and renting it for $400 per month simply won't work. So, one of two things will happen. The property will become abandoned and eventually have to torn down or an investor will put the $30K in, but now it will rent for double or more and push all the people that can't afford that rent away. Where they will go is anyone's guess. It has happened in other cities and progrssives have a name for it, they call it gentrfying and say the word with venom as if the people investing caused the problem. Nope, laws like this are what will eventually create it assuming it doesn't go the other way and just stay an abandoned, blighted, and crime ridden mess.

I know of several areas in Columbus that gentrifying has occured and some of those previously blighted and run down neighborhoods are now posh upper middle class areas. Where the people that used to live there went I am not sure of, but they couldn't afford to stay there. Unfortunately I am not sure Toledo will go that route. We don't have a dynamic and growing economy as Columbus does, we arent the state capital, and we don't have any modern industries coming in to provide jobs and higher incomes that would push up the need for housing to improve in those poorer areas of Toledo. I could be wrong and I hope I am. I would love to see the entire city improve, but I am just not convinced that is where this will go.

This is a big problem that will involve everyone if we want to find a true solution. Time will tell if we get there.

5 Reply

Janeile Cudjoe-Myers

Toledo, OH · Member since 2018 · 21 posts · 19 votes

4y

Quote from @Michael Temple:

I am with @Andrew Fidler and I don't think this is going away. The optics of the situation and its effect on politicians to now back off of this after all the rhetoric they whipped up is impossible. I believe the courts will eventually side with the city, BUT the question at hand is what does this look like after all that comes down. I have said all along if the city wants a law like this then EVERYBODY goes into the pot. Apartments, homeowners, etc. Not just one small select group of property owners. I have personally had issues with houses I was working on where the property next door had peeling paint but because they were an owner occupant they didn't have to address the issue. My property would have paint blowing into the yard that I had to clean up. If someone in my property were to have lead poisoning and the health department were called in I would be the only one under the microscope. The peeling paint coming off the neighbor's house wouldn't even be a factor in the investigation, discussion, and the lawsuits that would follow even if it was pointed out this could be the source of the problem. Therefore the only way to be fair is EVERYONE must comply or nobody.

I am all for improving housing, but not as an unfunded mandate that is thrown against only one group of property owners while ignoring all the other types of property owners (apartments & owner-occupants) and factors (lead pipes still in city water lines) that could go into the lead problem. Either we have an honest discussion about the problem as a whole and EVERYONE contributes to the solution or we let things stay as they are until EVERYONE is ready to be involved. Housing providers didn't create this problem over night by themselves. This has been a long time coming and it needs to be a community solution with every property involved, an efficient and effective inspection system that is fair, and most importantly A LOT of money to help property owners become compliant without bankrupting them. It is that last piece that will be the most problematic. Government is great at issuing mandates and fines to enforce, but not quite so good at providing funding to help with those mandates.

Andrew brings up another good point about the unintended consequences of this law if it is allowed to stand exactly as it is right now. This law was modeled after Rochester New York, where today the blighted housing stock stands at 35% and rising. Property owners have simply thrown up their hands and walked away and now you have a decreased supply of rentals and an increase in blighted and abandoned properties that are turning into eye sores and problems. That will likely happen in Toledo because as Andrew pointed out, putting in a $30K investment into a $20K house and renting it for $400 per month simply won't work. So, one of two things will happen. The property will become abandoned and eventually have to torn down or an investor will put the $30K in, but now it will rent for double or more and push all the people that can't afford that rent away. Where they will go is anyone's guess. It has happened in other cities and progrssives have a name for it, they call it gentrfying and say the word with venom as if the people investing caused the problem. Nope, laws like this are what will eventually create it assuming it doesn't go the other way and just stay an abandoned, blighted, and crime ridden mess.

I know of several areas in Columbus that gentrifying has occured and some of those previously blighted and run down neighborhoods are now posh upper middle class areas. Where the people that used to live there went I am not sure of, but they couldn't afford to stay there. Unfortunately I am not sure Toledo will go that route. We don't have a dynamic and growing economy as Columbus does, we arent the state capital, and we don't have any modern industries coming in to provide jobs and higher incomes that would push up the need for housing to improve in those poorer areas of Toledo. I could be wrong and I hope I am. I would love to see the entire city improve, but I am just not convinced that is where this will go.

This is a big problem that will involve everyone if we want to find a true solution. Time will tell if we get there.

Spot on about gentrification. I hate the way it's used as if it's a dirty word. Our political class is full of people who make policies that they can high-five themselves and feeeeel good about now but that have long-term, devastating effects on the populace - that they will later feel the need to "fix NOW". And the cycle continues until the voter figures out what's happening and removes them from office.

2 Reply

Renee F.

Real Estate Investor · Dallas, NC · Member since 2016 · 43 posts · 10 votes

3y

Quote from @Andrew Fidler: