What's Going On: Minimum standards a good idea, even for rental properties

 At its next meeting, Red Oak’s city council is expected to continue discussion on a set of building codes that, among other things, will require landlords to have their rental properties licensed and inspected every three years. 

At several opportunities, many local landlords have criticized the council, claiming they are being singled out for inspections while homeowners aren’t. They also argue the inspection fees, and presumably any costs associated with bringing their properties up to code, will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher rent. 

They are right on both counts; sort of. 

In Iowa, if you want to open a restaurant, you have to get a license and to do so, your property will be inspected. 

If you want to provide in-home day care, you have to get a license and there will be an inspection. 

Even my friend, Stan the barber, has to get a license and undergo inspections just to cut hair.

And none of their licenses are free and the expenses for them are all passed on to the consumer. 

Why are these businesses required to have licenses and be subsequent to inspections? Because they all provide a service in which the government has decided there is a minimum level of standards, most of which are related to consumer safety. 

Restaurant owners have to have sinks to clean equipment and must maintain foods at certain temperatures. Child care providers can’t be convicted sex offenders and their backyards have to be fenced. Stan the barber … well, I’m not entirely sure why he has to have a license and what it requires. Maybe he has to play a minimum amount of bluegrass music and give children under a certain age suckers. 

Regardless, these new codes are going to require rental properties to also meet minimal standards, many related to safety.  

There’s a separate discussion as to what extent those “minimal standards” should be. The minimum standards, though, haven’t been a topic of debate, at least not yet. 

What has been debated is whether there should be any or not. 

Personally, I think there should be. 

No, landlords shouldn’t be required to furnish air conditioning, but yes, they should have to provide an adequate heat source using either electricity or natural gas. 

No, landlords shouldn’t have to provide new carpet, but yes, if the residence does have carpet, it should be free of mold. 

No, landlords shouldn’t have to provide a Jacuzzi, but yes, they should have to provide a toilet. 

No, landlords shouldn’t have to provide multiple bathrooms, a furnished basement and a deck, but the space they do provide should be devoid of cockroaches and rats. 

A quick drive around town shows the consequences of not having those minimum standards. Any town where I’ve lived that didn’t have those codes was guaranteed to have homes that didn’t meet those previously mentioned minimum standards, and Red Oak is no exception. 

Landlords are no different than any other segment of the population; most are responsible and do the right thing while some, well, aren’t and don’t. 

And for those who don’t, we need codes like these to make sure they do. We shouldn’t accept shabby, sub-standard rental properties that are there simply to milk as much money out of their economically depressed tenants as possible. 

We should expect more, and tenants deserve more. 

They deserve a bare minimum when it comes to housing and when they get it, this community will be a better place to live and a more appealing one for those looking to relocate here. 

At that next meeting, I truly hope Red Oak’s Council, Mayor and City Administrator continue to have enough courage to stand up to the vocal minority and do what’s best for all of Red Oak. 

Gregory Orear is the General Manager/Editor of the Red Oak Express and Glenwood Opinion-Tribune. He can be contacted at publisher@redoakexpress.com.