Ms Flores, I heard recently that the resolution to crack down on landlords that might be deemed guilty of discrimination in their rental decisions had been indefinitely tabled. The resolution , as I read it, should be discarded. Some of the elements covered are legitimate concerns, but the language leaves too much interpretation of whether or not discrimination actually occurred . Landlords are by definition the owners of a property which makes them responsible for the maintenance and livability of the premises. They are faced with providing support for their tenants by keeping all of the systems- plumbing, electrical air conditioning etc – in working order no matter what may have caused them to malfunction. As landlords they know by experience that tenants frequently do not care for the property, and the law makes it very hard to evict anyone whether they have not paid their rent or are damaging the premises. A landlord must try to equitably determine if a potential tenant is going to be a responsible tenant or become a financial liability in the future. I have rented property, I know many people that have rental property and the song remains the same. Deciding who is going to be a profitable client and who will wind up costing you time ,money, and aggravation is hard. Now it seems that the city wants to be able to arbitrarily decide if discrimination has occurred , leaving landlords with the cost of an attorney should any disgruntled tenant point their finger and cry ‘wolf’ ! This is another step on the progressive path toward total control of we the people. The progressive agenda is based on the assumption that the ruling class is much more intelligent than the lower classes , giving them the right to manipulate and rule society , controlling every aspect of their lives. Resolution 23-022 is a step down the progressive highway. When it comes back up for consideration it must be thrown aside . Better options for renter protection can be found. Sincerely Jody Kincaid
