Cost Recovery Bylaw Under Study

Friday, February 08, 2008 04:07 AM

Prince George, B.C. - The City of Prince George, will soon have a new bylaw to look at, one that is aimed at helping the City deal with crack shacks.

Currently, bylaw enforcement is limited to ensuring the buildings meet the building code. Usually, City inspectors enter the premises after Police have made a raid on the property. The owner of the property then must bring the building back up to code before it can be rented out again.

By law Services Manager, Ken Craig says the renovations can be an incentive for landlords to ensure they have good clients “I know of one home that needed $10,000 in renovations, so that really stings. The owner of the property is now very careful about who rents that site.”

The new bylaw that will be put before Prince George City Council in the months to come, is based on a similar bylaw in Nanaimo. It calls for the recovery of costs related to dealing with drug houses and grow ops. Craig says the Nanaimo system is “running like a well oiled machine”. Craig says the fee schedule in Prince George will be similar.

In Nanaimo , should the fire department, RCMP or City officials have to deal with a “controlled substance property”, the owner, occupier, or both could be facing some hefty bills.

That city charges an hourly fee for police, fire department officials, city inspectors, equipment and vehicles involved in any aspect of dealing with a grow op.

If the costs are not paid, the amount owed can be attached to the tax bill, or the City may take the owner to court.

Here are some examples of the the fees and charges as set out in the Nanaimo bylaw (It should be noted the rates can be increased by 1 ½ to 2 times the amount depending on the day and time of the service):

Department	Hourly
Fire Chief	$ 68.75
4 Year Firefighter	$ 38.83
Aerial Apparatus	$650.00
Engineering & Public Works Manager	$ 49.92

RCMP Superintendent RCMP Constable City Labourer	$58.53 $ 34.39 $ 32.78

In Prince George, the Bylaw Services department is now pouring over a 16 page legal opinion on the Nanaimo bylaw. Manager Ken Craig says he expects to present the Prince George version to Council this spring, so the bylaw will be in place by the start of summer.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Friday, February 08, 2008 04:07 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: whitewater on February 8 2008 5:12 AM

Good luck getting money from the crack monkey.....landlord pays to support crack home so it is safe for the next one.

While home the home is being renovated go to the safe injection site please.

Posted by: opion1 on February 8 2008 6:08 AM

another law that will not be enforced

Posted by: diplomat on February 8 2008 7:35 AM

"Aerial Apparatus $650.00"

Does that refer to a blimp or helicopter
hovering overhead for one hour?

Posted by: metalman on February 8 2008 8:05 AM

This makes things tough for landlords, and I do not believe it is fair.
What I think is that this is yet another example of our political leaders and lawmakers shirking their real duty; keep our lives safe. Rules like this one place the onus on the honest, hardworking taxpaying citizen, again. Like 'Grant's law' the burden is placed on the majority of us, while those who actually cause the misery, grief, suffering, property damage, get a free ride. To further piss me off, they do not even have to pay income tax, or payroll deductions for their 'employees'
Why should we suffer at the pleasure of the filth of the world?
The answer is: because our lawmakers and "leaders" are gutless at best, maybe even irresponsible, possibly in office for their own gain, and a sense of power.
I'll tell you, I am nearly fed up with this whole situation.
metalman.

Posted by: Jimmi on February 8 2008 8:18 AM

tough for landllords?

no sympathy here

Posted by: Free Enterprise on February 8 2008 8:29 AM

I think our City Hall is on crack! I deal in the rental industry and the problem is that lack of very stiff law enforcement and the lack of our courts to send a message to those that deal. The other very big issue is our Provincial Rental Rules. A property owner cannot kick people out of the rental property for no proven reason. The police and courts can�t prove these crack dealers are doing anything most of the time, so what makes you think a landlord can? You have to give two full months notice to a tenant that is wrecking your property. Therefore, this needs to be dealt with from the top down not the bottom up. The city has a lot more things to deal with than to destroy the rental market that does not have enough rentals for those that need them in the first place. If the city does not smarten up and focus on the true cause the city will find it having to build rental property to handle the volume of tenants that are growing.

City Hall please give your head a shake and where are our city councilors?

Posted by: northman on February 8 2008 8:33 AM

Good post Free Enterprise!

Posted by: Palopu on February 8 2008 9:03 AM

As usual nail the innocent because they cannot or will not nail the guilty. This bylaw would be more effective if it gave the Landlord the right to immediatley evict the tenants and have them held liable for any damage. Whats the chance of that happening.

In addition its time the Income Tax People got off their fat butts and started to look into these peoples income. All income is taxable, and if you cannot show where your income comes from, or whether or not you paid income tax on it, then you should be charged with tax evasion. Even illegal income is taxable. Thats how they got Al Capone, so surely they can get the locals if they put their minds to it.

Posted by: Death to Socialism on February 8 2008 9:51 AM

Free enterprise is dead on. It's not like tenants put "Occupation: Crack Dealer" on the rental app. It's not as easy to screen tenants as you might like to think.

Posted by: Howrd_B_Stern on February 8 2008 9:52 AM

I am a new landlord and believe me there are good landlords and bad landlords. I bought property off a bad landlord who really didn't care much about things like credit checks, who he rented to, or even maintaining the place to an acceptable standard of safety. $40,000 in reno work and many surprises later, I have good tenants and a belief that if I am diligent in renting to only good tenants, that hopefully the neighborhood in which my property resides, will improve. Yes, the Residential Tenancy Act sucks, but it was put in place because of bad landlords.

Posted by: kagee on February 8 2008 12:42 PM

Even if landlord are diligent and screen their tenants they still run into problems. I know landloard that visited her tenant each month and was invited in for tea each time and yet it was raid as a grow op.

In our case the back ground checks were great but after a bit we though someting was not right. We went to the police and told them and we also tried to remove the tenants. No luck but after numerous complaints from the neighbours(we had complained to the police many times)the police finally raided the unit and destroyed walls, doors, etc.

So what is a landlord to do?

Posted by: kagee on February 8 2008 12:42 PM

Posted by: caranmacil on February 8 2008 2:35 PM

i have been a landlord for 20 years and all i can say is: good luck howard! Maybe when we head back into a slow down and you have 30 percent or higher vacancy you will think different!
For those of you who have never dealt with prospective tenants, here is some info: they lie. their supposed references are often faked by friends, their own sainted mothers will fib for them as well. THere are good tenants and bad tenants, just like all people. And just like all people, you cant tell which ones are which. Also, i have had tenants go from good, to grow ops due to changes in their financial situations.
The city is trying to do something. Since law enforcement is out of their jurisdiction, they rely on bylaws. Since criminals dont pay bylaw fines and crack heads dont have any money they want to go after people who are law abiding. It stinks to high heaven.
The tenancy act is not the problem. I have pursued people with bad debts thru the act and won, only to find that i had to chase the people all over town, without any way of finding their new addresses, only to find out that you cant get blood from a stone.
If i had an easy solution to the whole problem i would share it. Perhaps the solution just involves people doing whats right. PAy your bills, obey the law dont lie for other people and above all, dont rationalize your bad behaviour so it seems ok. I dont treat tenants like suspects, even though i have had my share of troubles with them. Dont treat landlords like the enemy, or act high and mighty towards them, until you have tried walking in their shoes.

Posted by: Runner46 on February 8 2008 11:22 PM

Way to go caranmacil, some one with a birds eye view of the situation who thinks with his/her heart, not just the wallet.

Good stuff to read.

tks

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on February 9 2008 8:06 AM

Over time the hourly rates for city services will apply for all sorts of situations, not just crack shacks. In a few years all visits by city employees will be chargeable and you will have to prove why you shouldn't be sent a bill. Like maybe you are a city councillor and your house got flooded because it was built in a flood plain. No charge.

Posted by: metalman on February 9 2008 2:15 PM

What does your landlord demand from you, Jimmi? that you pay your rent on time, pay the utilities, pick up your garbage, don't damage the house? As is stated above, there are good and bad landlords, don't assume that all of them are against you. I have been in the position of renting out a couple of houses for a few years, and could not get away from it fast enough.
Both houses were not in a high rent district, and I found that my clientele and their friends were not the type of people who did all or any of the points I outlined above. I don't think I ever had to pay back a damage deposit, because nearly all of the tenants skipped in the middle of the night, leaving a mess, damage, and owing rent. The houses were not fancy, but clean and well kept, they were not slum material, so I do not understand why these people would leave a mess and not pick up two or three hundred dollars they had coming. This was years ago, before crack or crystal meth came to town (as far as I know)

Posted by: thereasonableman on February 9 2008 2:58 PM

Let's just kick everybody out on the street, and only those who have no criminal record, have city leaders and clergy as references, and have steady work that pays over $100,000 /yr can rent.

Everybody else lives in cardboard boxes and tents.

Meanwhile, the landlords can turn their properties into museums.

That'll solve the problem for sure.

Posted by: Chester on February 10 2008 8:08 PM

I too have been (past tense) a landlord and will not ever consider the responsibility again. I have never felt so violated, abused, taken advantage of, lied to, ripped off and outright victimized as my days as a landlord. The laws and rights favoured the tenant no matter what. You couldn't warn other landlords of bad tenants either. The government protects the bad ones, inspite of their behavior. Oh, by the way, that was back in the day of the NDP. The NDP and their policies also caused the biggest financial setback in my lifetime. I say good luck to them, as they have no idea where the money comes from and no idea of the importance of entrepreneurs, investors and business people. Until they figure out where the money and jobs come from, they will never successfully run a province or a country. Chester