St. Bernard owners fed up
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Re: "Give it up already," Our Opinions, April 10.
The Times-Picayune's recent editorial comments mention only the Florida investors as plaintiffs in the litigation. However, a substantial number of hard-working and commuinity-minded St. Bernard Parish property owners have joined in the lawsuit and the horizon of plaintiffs is expanding rapidly.
It should not go unnoticed that both responsible tenants and quality local homeowners from St. Bernard are suffering the brunt of the parish's oppresive tactics.
Advertisement
Notwithstanding the court's order, tenants continue to receive threats to disconnect their utilities and generally disrupt the modicum of peace available from occupying a refurbished house.
The court's order is intended to protect all those who are plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and that now includes many good St. Bernard Parish citizens who have paid good money to help their community recover.
Henry Klein
New Orleans
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Join Our Lawsuit
It's not too late to join the Federal Lawsuit filed against St. Bernard Parish,challenging the unconstitutional nature of their discriminatory rental ordinance.Your Home Solution Management LLC,and their clients are currently the only ones who have court ordered relief from continuous harassment of evictions and utility disconnections by the Parish towards rental tenants.Damages are being sought as well from the Parish for violating constitutional property rights of YHS Mgt.s clients.
Contact: Rodney Brenneman today for more information.
Contact: Rodney Brenneman today for more information.
Parish runs up against the Constitution
Jarvis DeBerry
Friday, April 11, 2008
Jarvis DeBerry
Given that it was written and amended so long ago, one would think that news of the Constitution would have reached St. Bernard Parish by now.
Officials in other jurisdictions have acquainted themselves with the document -- or at least hired lawyers who've seen it -- but St. Bernard officials figure they'd do just as well without the Constitution and its limits on government power.
In places governed by the laws of the United States, politicians don't have the right to abridge a law-abiding citizen's property rights. In St. Bernard, however, the Parish Council granted itself the authority to do what the Constitution says it can't. It passed an ordinance that forbids homeowners from renting their homes unless the Parish Council grants them express permission.
Advertisement
If those councilmembers had forgotten that they operate within the borders of the United States, they should be reminded now that they've been dragged into United States District Court in New Orleans. They'll find it to be a different kind of place, a place where the Constitution does apply.
Sometimes it applies rather quickly. Having been sued last month, St. Bernard Parish has already been issued a temporary restraining order, preventing the parish from enforcing the ordinance.
The plaintiffs, 25 investors who are mostly from Florida, call the ordinance "unduly oppressive" because it forces those who want to rent their homes to undergo "an intimidating, irrational, oppressive and indefensible process."
The ordinance is only "indefensible" if one expects it to jibe with the Constitution. But so long as there's not such an expectation, one can make the argument that renters are undesirables and that it is the duty of a local government to keep such undesirables away.
That's parish officials' argument: that it is their duty to enforce a pre-Katrina percentage of owner-occupied homes, that an influx of renters will be a scourge on the parish, that such concerns give them permission to restrict individual rights.
Are neighborhoods filled with owner-occupied homes better than those with mostly renters? Generally speaking, yes. Are absentee landlords highly regarded? Generally not. Does distaste for such property owners or for those renting from them justify St. Bernard's ordinance? Expect the courts to say no.
The original ordinance drafted by Craig Taffaro in December 2006 had an extra dose of offensiveness, in that it required a renter to be a blood relative of the person who owns the property -- unless the owner came to the Parish Council and begged its permission.
It is theoretically possible that the blood relative clause was not meant to keep people who aren't white from renting property in an overwhelmingly white parish. But no matter the intent, the ordinance would still have had a discriminatory effect.
The parish put up a pathetic but costly legal fight after the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Committee objected to the blood-relative clause. The parish settled with the fair housing group for $32,500 and got rid of just that clause. The edited ordinance requires every potential landlord to seek permission from the parish -- and threatens those who don't with fines or jail -- as if abridging everybody's rights makes the ordinance acceptable.
David Peralta, St. Bernard Parish's chief administrative officer, said last month that all 25 homeowners who've applied for a rental permit have been approved. He, therefore, can't understand why the plaintiffs are making a fuss.
Advertisement
"We haven't turned anyone down," he said. "Why don't they apply for a permit and see what happens?"
Because doing so would be an admission that the St. Bernard Parish Council has the authority to decide if a property owner has full rights to his or her property -- when everybody with knowledge of the law knows it does not. The plaintiffs have two goals: to rent their properties as they see fit and to put St. Bernard's meddling government in its place. To apply is to submit. To triumph will be to have the ordinance struck from the books.
The plaintiffs are from Florida, but when they win their case, they will have won for all of us; for they will have forced the St. Bernard Parish Council to recognize the Constitution. St. Bernard's voters should have done that themselves and voted out everybody who thought it wise to draft a stupid ordinance and waste their tax dollars defending it.
They say bought sense is the best sense. St. Bernard Parish is buying a look at the Constitution, when it could have glanced at it for free.
. . . . . . .
Jarvis DeBerry is an editorial writer. He can be reached at (504) 826-3355 or at jdeberry@timespicayune.com.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Jarvis DeBerry
Given that it was written and amended so long ago, one would think that news of the Constitution would have reached St. Bernard Parish by now.
Officials in other jurisdictions have acquainted themselves with the document -- or at least hired lawyers who've seen it -- but St. Bernard officials figure they'd do just as well without the Constitution and its limits on government power.
In places governed by the laws of the United States, politicians don't have the right to abridge a law-abiding citizen's property rights. In St. Bernard, however, the Parish Council granted itself the authority to do what the Constitution says it can't. It passed an ordinance that forbids homeowners from renting their homes unless the Parish Council grants them express permission.
Advertisement
If those councilmembers had forgotten that they operate within the borders of the United States, they should be reminded now that they've been dragged into United States District Court in New Orleans. They'll find it to be a different kind of place, a place where the Constitution does apply.
Sometimes it applies rather quickly. Having been sued last month, St. Bernard Parish has already been issued a temporary restraining order, preventing the parish from enforcing the ordinance.
The plaintiffs, 25 investors who are mostly from Florida, call the ordinance "unduly oppressive" because it forces those who want to rent their homes to undergo "an intimidating, irrational, oppressive and indefensible process."
The ordinance is only "indefensible" if one expects it to jibe with the Constitution. But so long as there's not such an expectation, one can make the argument that renters are undesirables and that it is the duty of a local government to keep such undesirables away.
That's parish officials' argument: that it is their duty to enforce a pre-Katrina percentage of owner-occupied homes, that an influx of renters will be a scourge on the parish, that such concerns give them permission to restrict individual rights.
Are neighborhoods filled with owner-occupied homes better than those with mostly renters? Generally speaking, yes. Are absentee landlords highly regarded? Generally not. Does distaste for such property owners or for those renting from them justify St. Bernard's ordinance? Expect the courts to say no.
The original ordinance drafted by Craig Taffaro in December 2006 had an extra dose of offensiveness, in that it required a renter to be a blood relative of the person who owns the property -- unless the owner came to the Parish Council and begged its permission.
It is theoretically possible that the blood relative clause was not meant to keep people who aren't white from renting property in an overwhelmingly white parish. But no matter the intent, the ordinance would still have had a discriminatory effect.
The parish put up a pathetic but costly legal fight after the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Committee objected to the blood-relative clause. The parish settled with the fair housing group for $32,500 and got rid of just that clause. The edited ordinance requires every potential landlord to seek permission from the parish -- and threatens those who don't with fines or jail -- as if abridging everybody's rights makes the ordinance acceptable.
David Peralta, St. Bernard Parish's chief administrative officer, said last month that all 25 homeowners who've applied for a rental permit have been approved. He, therefore, can't understand why the plaintiffs are making a fuss.
Advertisement
"We haven't turned anyone down," he said. "Why don't they apply for a permit and see what happens?"
Because doing so would be an admission that the St. Bernard Parish Council has the authority to decide if a property owner has full rights to his or her property -- when everybody with knowledge of the law knows it does not. The plaintiffs have two goals: to rent their properties as they see fit and to put St. Bernard's meddling government in its place. To apply is to submit. To triumph will be to have the ordinance struck from the books.
The plaintiffs are from Florida, but when they win their case, they will have won for all of us; for they will have forced the St. Bernard Parish Council to recognize the Constitution. St. Bernard's voters should have done that themselves and voted out everybody who thought it wise to draft a stupid ordinance and waste their tax dollars defending it.
They say bought sense is the best sense. St. Bernard Parish is buying a look at the Constitution, when it could have glanced at it for free.
. . . . . . .
Jarvis DeBerry is an editorial writer. He can be reached at (504) 826-3355 or at jdeberry@timespicayune.com.
EDITORIAL: Give it up already
Thursday, April 10, 2008
St. Bernard Parish officials continue to waste taxpayers' money defending an ill-conceived home-rental ordinance -- even as the parish's financial exposure grows larger.
That's neither good public policy nor sound fiscal administration.
The cash-starved parish already had to spend $32,500 to settle an anti-discrimination suit against an earlier version of the ordinance, conceived by then-Councilman Craig Taffaro, who last year was elected parish president.
Advertisement
The original law required council approval for homeowners to rent to anyone who was not a blood relative. The parish dropped that provision after the suit was filed in 2006. But St. Bernard likely spent thousands of dollars in legal fees before settling.
Now the parish is facing a new lawsuit challenging the remaining parts of the rental ordinance. The current law still requires council permits to rent out houses that weren't rentals before the storm. In the new suit, owners of 80 properties claim that violates their constitutional and property rights, and U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance has ordered the parish to temporarily stop enforcing the law.
The lawsuit that the parish settled involved housing advocates and only one property owner, who sought mostly to end the law's discriminatory effects. By contrast, the new suit seeks compensation for what the owners allege is a drop in value for dozens of properties. Thus, the potential exposure for parish taxpayers is greater this time if St. Bernard loses the suit or has to settle.
The prudent step is for President Taffaro and the Parish Council to rescind this controversial law -- a suggestion they have stubbornly resisted.
Officials defend the law as a way to prevent a flood of cheap and unattended rentals. But other parishes accomplish that goal with maintenance and zoning regulations that don't have the same risk of litigation.
St. Bernard's law professes that the measure "shall preserve the constitutional rights of all persons for home ownership." A better way to guarantee that -- and stop wasting public dollars -- would be to get rid of the ordinance.
St. Bernard Parish officials continue to waste taxpayers' money defending an ill-conceived home-rental ordinance -- even as the parish's financial exposure grows larger.
That's neither good public policy nor sound fiscal administration.
The cash-starved parish already had to spend $32,500 to settle an anti-discrimination suit against an earlier version of the ordinance, conceived by then-Councilman Craig Taffaro, who last year was elected parish president.
Advertisement
The original law required council approval for homeowners to rent to anyone who was not a blood relative. The parish dropped that provision after the suit was filed in 2006. But St. Bernard likely spent thousands of dollars in legal fees before settling.
Now the parish is facing a new lawsuit challenging the remaining parts of the rental ordinance. The current law still requires council permits to rent out houses that weren't rentals before the storm. In the new suit, owners of 80 properties claim that violates their constitutional and property rights, and U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance has ordered the parish to temporarily stop enforcing the law.
The lawsuit that the parish settled involved housing advocates and only one property owner, who sought mostly to end the law's discriminatory effects. By contrast, the new suit seeks compensation for what the owners allege is a drop in value for dozens of properties. Thus, the potential exposure for parish taxpayers is greater this time if St. Bernard loses the suit or has to settle.
The prudent step is for President Taffaro and the Parish Council to rescind this controversial law -- a suggestion they have stubbornly resisted.
Officials defend the law as a way to prevent a flood of cheap and unattended rentals. But other parishes accomplish that goal with maintenance and zoning regulations that don't have the same risk of litigation.
St. Bernard's law professes that the measure "shall preserve the constitutional rights of all persons for home ownership." A better way to guarantee that -- and stop wasting public dollars -- would be to get rid of the ordinance.
Developers challenge St. Bernard’s rezoning rules in court
Rental ruckus
A zoning hearing notice is posted in front of a rental home on Corrine Drive in Chalmette. (Photo by Frank Aymami)
ADVERTISEMENT
Real estate investor Rodney Brenneman had no intention of becoming a spokesman for the rights of renters when he bought the ravaged remains of a one-story St. Bernard Parish home in 2006 with the intention of a quick renovation and sale.
One year — and one lawsuit — later, the suntanned businessman from Lakeland, Fla., has emerged as an unlikely bullhorn for low-income and often non-white renters in the post-Hurricane Katrina battle over who will return to the quiet, driveway-lined subdivisions that have long defined the parish.
“The people most in need, which are those who can’t afford to buy a single family home, are the people being discriminated against,” said Brenneman, one of 25 out-of-state investors who bought 80 St. Bernard properties through their business, Your Home Solution Louisiana. Last month, the company filed a lawsuit against the St. Bernard Parish Council accusing it of violating the constitutional property rights of owners who choose to rent, lease or offer lease-to-own houses in the parish.
The lawsuit seeks to overturn a post-Katrina rental regulation requiring property owners wishing to rent or lease properties to first obtain a “permissive use permit” from the St. Bernard Parish Council for properties that weren’t rentals before the storm.
The ordinance “requires property owners who wish to rent or lease or lease-to-own their property undergo an intimidating, irrational, oppressive and indefensible process,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Henry Klein in the federal lawsuit filed in March, only two weeks after the parish settled a suit alleging a previous version of the ordinance that limited the permit to those renting to non-relatives was racially discriminatory.
While U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Vance stopped enforcement of the ordinance at the properties in litigation with a temporary restraining order April 3, the 25 investors and their tenants say they have lost significant amounts of money and time to heavy-handed attempts from the parish to pressure owners to stop renting.
Enforcement already has pushed at least three tenants to move out after eviction was threatened and utilities were disconnected. Under the rules, fines of up to $250 “for each day of unpermitted rental, lease or occupancy” were also levied on owners and tenants.
“The power people gave me running water but they won’t give me lights because they say the parish won’t give them permission. Now there is a notice of condemnation on the house,” said Zachary Alveris, who paid $1,500 in rent to Your Home Solution Louisiana before he realized the newly renovated Chalmette home he had secured for his girlfriend and two daughters lacked electrical power.
Alveris, who was refused power shortly after moving in his plush sofa and boxes of Pocahontas-themed toys in February, was given a full refund on his rent and said he plans to restart the lease on his Plaza Drive rental now that the courts have ordered parish officials to turn the lights back on.
“Really and truly I don’t feel comfortable there, but I need somewhere to live,” said Alveris, who has been living with his mother in her Harvey home since being evicted. African-Americans such as Alveris make up 70 percent of the 54 Your Home Solution Louisiana renters, said Brenneman.
The YHS plan was to renovate the properties and “quickly sell” them for between $135,000 and $165,000, said Brenneman, an investor and an employee of the parent company, Your Home Solution Management, which manages investor-owned properties in Central Florida and the New Orleans region.
In addition to the St. Bernard properties, the company has built homes in Slidell, Lakeview and eastern New Orleans.
Brenneman estimates the 25 investors have spent $8 million on rehabbing the 80 St. Bernard homes.
Foiled by a market nearly buckling under the weight of thousands of vacant, renovated homes for sale and a national mortgage crisis, Your Home Solutions decided late last year to rent the unsold St. Bernard homes until the market improved. The decision to rent the units was made out of economic necessity, said Brenneman.
Of the 80 YHS homes, only one has sold. Another two are set to close this month and 54 are rented. Nine homes haven’t been renovated because the investors have fallen short on construction dollars, and 14 finished homes remain vacant and available for rent or sale, according to YHS documents.
The 14 vacant homes are a small percentage of the uninhabited plots lining St. Bernard streets, where nearly 6,000 homes have been demolished and are awaiting sales through The Road Home. In Chalmette, 224 homes are being marketed by Realtors, according to Latter& Blum.
Brenneman said investors didn’t comply with the St. Bernard permit requirement because “its criteria was so unreasonable and there were no assurances that we would even get the permits.” The requirements for public approval include applying to the parish Planning Commission for a review, notifying by certified letter all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed rental and publishing a public notice for three consecutive weeks.
“It was an unreasonable amount to ask of an investor who has already put his life savings into building houses for people who needed places to live,” said Dan Brenneman, father of Rodney Brenneman and owner of six Your Home Solution rental properties. Brennenam, who is a complainant in the lawsuit, said he spent “nearly a million dollars” on his properties, scattered among various Chalmette subdivisions.
“I am about tapped out,” he said. “My tenants are receiving eviction notices. They are working people with families who are getting notices that they are being evicted. How can I give them refunds when I am almost out of money?”
St. Bernard Parish President Craig Taffaro Jr., who introduced the year-and-a-half old ordinance as a member of the council, declined to comment because of the litigation. St Bernard officials say the ordinance is intended to “stabilize” post-Katrina property values and protect the character of parish neighborhoods.
“Our critical task is trying to stabilize real estate values and the neighborhoods for the people who own property here,” said District A Councilman Ray Lauga Jr.
Lauga said the council has approved all 25 of the permit applications it has received and is now trying to move along “several mixed-income developments.”
“If you can meet the four criteria for the permit, there is no reason to deny it,” he said. “We aren’t treating renters any different than anyone else.”
Meanwhile, those caught living behind yellow lawn signs that mark homes that were never given permission to be rented feel as if they have been persecuted because they can’t afford to buy a house.
“I feel embarrassed because I am the only person in the neighborhood with a sign on the lawn, the only person who has to deal with inspectors coming in and making us feel like we shouldn’t be here,” said Mary Manisfield, who has lived with her husband, daughter, son and grandson in a newly renovated ranch home in Chalmette since January.
Manisfield lived in a Meraux trailer park before Katrina. After the storm ripped her trailer apart, the Manisfields moved into a Federal Emergency Management Agency-managed park where they lived until leasing the Your Home Solution rental. She has been fighting to stay in the house since an eviction notice landed on her door Feb. 4.
“My grandson has a yard to play in for the first time,” Manisfield said. “It’s the best place we’ve been and we are not going to just pack up and leave.”•
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)