New Penalties For Landlords Who Don’t Fix Lead Hazards

A proposal pending before the Common Council would increase the penalties for landlords who don’t correct lead hazards in their properties. It also adds protections for tenants who report lead-based nuisances.

The leading sponsor and council president Jose G. Perez said he is advancing the ordinance following the city’s injection of $26 million in federal funds to address childhood lead poisoning and growing confidence in the Milwaukee Health Department.

“This is really part of giving the health department more tools as we expect them to ramp up with the investment we’ve made to abate more properties,” said Perez in presenting the proposal to the Public Safety & Health Committee on July 21. The proposal triples the limit on forfeitures for violations, creates an inspection fee framework when lead orders are issued, allows a property to be placarded for non-occupancy, provides a pathway for court-ordered abatement work and a cost recovery assessment and allows a failure to comply to be referred to the Department of Neighborhood Services for rent withholding approval.

The ordinance would come into effect primarily after a child tests positive for elevated blood lead levels and is referred to the city’s childhood lead poisoning prevention program. Inspectors visit homes to check for lead hazards, often peeling or chipping paint. Orders to correct hazards are issued, which triggers fee-based inspections.

The proposal would grant the health commissioner authority to charge a $150 fee for inspections triggered by a lead hazard reduction order, and $300 for reinspections. No charge would be issued if an inspection reveals compliance with the order. Sustained non-compliance could result in fines of up to $30,000.

Landlords would be prevented from evicting tenants, raising rents or otherwise retaliating when the tenant reported a possible lead violation or took other actions to address a “lead-based nuisance.” Property owners would still be able to evict tenants for other issues, but would need a “preponderance of evidence” to prove it was not driven by lead-related actions.

“I think it’s fair and it’s not much to ask landlords to do,” said Perez. He noted he is a landlord himself now, having moved within his council district a few years ago.

Heiner Giese, legal counsel for the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin, said his organization was concerned about the presumption of innocence for tenants. “The problem is… any eviction is presumed to be for retaliation,” said Giese. The attorney said it would allow tenants to delay evictions at a cost to landlords.

“There are other reasons that a landlord could raise to show good cause,” said assistant city attorney Tom Miller. He said it moved the balance of power towards tenants. “You already have the state statutes written and it’s clearly in your court.”

But Giese said that shift was already happening. “That imbalance is changing somewhat now that tenants have attorneys,” said Giese referring to city and county right-to-counsel efforts.

Perez said the lead-based tenant protections were being added at the request of community members. “They’re afraid, they’re afraid of their landlords,” said the alderman of the perceived low number of requests.

Coalition on Lead Emergency (COLE) member Maria Beltran spoke in favor of the proposal, particularly its tenant protections. A Lindsay Heights resident, she said two of her grandchildren needed therapy as a result of lead poisoning. Beltran said she doesn’t rent out the other half of her duplex because of fears of lead poisoning. “Our homes are really bad,” she said.

An order to demolish a property could be issued if the cost to abate the lead hazards would exceed 50% of the value of the structure. “The referral for a raze order is intended to be used in extreme cases when lead hazards make a building essentially unlivable,” said Perez.

“There is a real stick here for those extreme cases,” said Ald. Scott Spiker.

“I hope this legislation is another tool that helps us get to a point where we don’t have to see reports of so many people being infected with lead at such high levels,” said Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs in thanking Perez for his work. She has previously requested a lead-safe property database be compiled.

Ald. Russell W. Stamper, II called for the proposal to also apply to city-owned homes. Perez committed to working with him on the issue.

The proposal is co-sponsored by council members Spiker, Coggs, Stamper, JoCasta Zamarripa, Mark Borkowski and. Khalif Rainey.

The committee unanimously recommended adopting the proposal.

The full council is to consider the proposal on July 28. But deputy health commissioner Tyler Weber said even if adopted it would take time for it to be fully implemented. “It’s not going to be a light switch as soon as this is adopted,” he said, citing training and IT systems. “We are working to continue to scale up the department.”