New Freedom schedules separate public meeting after heated debate over proposed renter ordinance

New Freedom Borough Council voted May 12 to schedule a separate public meeting to continue work on a proposed rental-housing and occupancy ordinance after more than two hours of public comment and extended council discussion.

The council agreed the item needs more public input and policy refinement rather than immediate adoption. Mayor Kim Butcher and Borough Manager Andrew Schafer said the draft shown at the meeting had been revised since it was posted, and solicitors’ suggestions narrowed several inspection provisions. Council then approved a motion to hold a standalone public meeting (targeted for roughly 45 days from the May 12 meeting) to take further public comment and refine the draft.

The proposed ordinance would require owners of rental property to register units with the borough and sets an enforcement framework for property maintenance standards already enforced through the International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) and other state and local codes. Solicitor Walt Tilley told council he had recommended edits to the draft to make inspections more predictable and to limit the local standards to enforcement of existing codes rather than a new set of requirements.

Residents and landlords gave sharply different views during public comment. Sherry Miller, who identified herself as a landlord with property in the borough, urged the council to “craft an ordinance that does not punish the many for the negligence of a few,” arguing that blanket inspection rules and high fees would burden responsible small landlords. Christie Smith, who said she rents in the borough, opposed a provision she described as allowing inspection “at any reasonable hour,” saying it would intrude on renters’ privacy and asked the council to clarify whether inspections would require prior notice. Devin Taylor, who said he is a borough renter and a veteran, said he strongly opposed the draft as an overreach of government authority.

Councilors and staff spent much of the discussion on three recurring concerns: when inspections may occur, who may trigger a complaint-based inspection, and how fees and fines would be set and applied. Several council members and Solicitor Tilley emphasized that the draft presented at the meeting had been pared back from more expansive versions used by neighboring boroughs. Tilley said the draft was intended to: focus inspections on the property-maintenance standards that already exist, allow inspections primarily between tenancies or in response to a tenant complaint, and provide tiered enforcement with re-inspections after violations rather than automatic punitive steps.

Councilors and public speakers repeatedly raised the possibility of legal challenge. Commenters cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s Camara decision on administrative inspections and warned about Fourth Amendment concerns if warrantless entry were allowed. Councilors responded that the revised draft would clarify that inspections would be performed either in response to a tenant’s complaint or at scheduled times when a unit is unoccupied, and that staff would bring a further refined draft and supporting materials to the separate meeting.

No ordinance or regulation was adopted at the May 12 meeting. The council’s formal action was to approve a separate public meeting (a motion passed by voice vote) to gather further input and return with a revised draft. Council members asked staff to circulate existing state and federal materials, related municipal ordinances from surrounding communities and the solicitor’s mark-up to give residents more time to review before the standalone meeting.

The council instructed staff to publicize the planned meeting on the borough’s notification systems; a date around June 24 was discussed as fitting the 45-day notice window councilors requested but had not been finalized in the meeting minutes.

What happens next: the council set a process step — not a policy change — and directed staff and counsel to prepare a revised draft and background materials for the standalone meeting so residents and landlords can comment in a focused forum.