Council postpones green rental housing ordinance after extensive public comment

Ann Arbor City Council postponed consideration of the proposed green rental housing ordinance to its first meeting in June after extensive public comment on May 5.

The ordinance, which would add sections 8,533 through 8,540 to the city housing code to create a green rental housing standard, drew more than a dozen public commenters who described both practical barriers and environmental benefits. Several rental‑property managers and small landlords said the proposal as written would impose substantial compliance costs and administrative burdens on owners of single‑family rentals and older housing stock. Others, including sustainability and tenant advocates, urged approval as a practical step toward the city’s carbon‑reduction goals.

Why it matters: rentals make up a majority of Ann Arbor’s housing stock; the ordinance aims to raise housing energy efficiency and health measures but speakers argued the draft needs clearer compliance supports, incentive programs and cost estimates before adoption.

What speakers said - Amy Conley, rental-property manager with Reinhardt Ann Arbor, said the scoring system "heavily favors electrification" and cited local billing comparisons showing higher electric‑only costs for some units. - Morgan Detve, director of a property management company, asked for incentives, longer timelines and easier waiver options, saying many rental providers operate on thin or negative margins. - Judy McDonald, property manager at Charles Reinhardt Company, read an owner letter criticizing the proposed checklist as "extraordinary and impossible" and questioned tenant responsibilities for maintaining new appliances and smart devices. - Lisa Spitz, Ward 1 resident and program manager for the Washtenaw/Ann Arbor 2030 District, spoke in support, saying many low‑cost measures should already meet requirements and offering free training and resources for landlords. - Other speakers urged postponement so the city could analyze HERS pilot scores, clarify rebate and incentive availability, and develop targeted support for smaller landlords and lower‑rent properties.

Council action: Councilmember Cornell moved and Councilmember Watson seconded a motion to postpone consideration of the ordinance to the first council meeting in June; the motion was approved by voice vote. Council recorded that Councilmember Harrison had submitted questions and proposed amendments in advance.

Next steps: staff are expected to return with answers to submitted questions, pilot HERS data and discussion of incentives or waiver options before council takes up the measure in June.