Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rental Fee Disclosure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council amends rental-fee disclosure proposal, adopts two amendments and leaves ordinance on second reading
Summary
Councilmembers approved a 90-day effective-delay amendment and a clause excluding landlord responsibility for third-party electronic listings, heard public comment from managers and students, and left the ordinance on second reading for further review.
The Fayetteville City Council debated and amended a proposed ordinance (section 1 20.03) that would require landlords and property owners to disclose all fees and costs for residential rental listings before a prospective tenant is asked to pay for application review or background checks. Councilmember Moore presented the item March 18 as a response to a declared housing crisis and resident complaints about hidden or unexpected rental charges.
Councilmember Moore described three concerns motivating the ordinance: proliferation of fees, lack of up-front disclosure of the full "all-in costs," and unclear criteria used in application screening. "We did declare a housing crisis in April of 2024," Moore said, and the proposed disclosure rule, she said, aims to offer consumer protection without recreating conflicts with state law.
During discussion, Councilmember Turk proposed adding a delayed effective date so landlords and managers could implement the disclosure; the council approved an amendment setting a three-month implementation period after passage. Councilmember Burna raised concerns about listings that are syndicated by third-party platforms and proposed language to limit landlord liability for electronic media outside their control. City Attorney Kit Williams read proposed ordinance language and read the amendment text for the record; the council approved the liability-limiting amendment as well.
Public commenters included Carrie Elder, a property manager with 35 years in local real-estate investment and management. Elder described common listing and application workflows and urged a practical approach; she recommended a policy that would refund an application fee if a prospective tenant applies and then discovers additional fees they cannot afford and asked the council to consider a 48-hour refund practice. Student commenter Peyton Hooten said the change was "much needed" and urged better transparency for students who face long lead times and tight finances when seeking housing.
After amendments and public comment, several councilmembers said more due diligence was needed in light of new information submitted by property managers that afternoon. Councilmember Stafford recommended leaving the ordinance on second reading for additional work; councilmembers agreed and the ordinance was not taken to final passage at the March 18 meeting.
Outcome: Two amendments were adopted (90-day delayed effective date; clarification that landlords and rental management companies are not responsible for electronic media outside their control). The ordinance itself was left on second reading for further review; staff and councilmembers said they would pursue follow-up with stakeholders and the city's housing task force.
