Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Rental Registry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees ask staff for research on rental‑registration program after probing enforcement and revenue assumptions
Summary
The board discussed a proposed rental‑registration program that had been included as a $50,000 revenue item in the budget. Trustees and counsel flagged enforcement complexities and constitutional limits; staff and counsel were directed to research comparable programs and return with concrete numbers and implementation options.
Trustees spent an extended portion of the June 10 work session discussing a proposed rental/landlord registration program that appears in the budget with a $50,000 revenue assumption.
Supporters of further study said a registration program could help the village address illegal apartments and provide contact information to reach owners in emergencies. Several trustees, however, and the interim manager warned that the village does not currently have sufficient enforcement capacity and that a registration fee can legally be used only to support the program itself (not to generate general‑fund revenue). Counsel advised the board that establishing a program without reliable counts and a clear cost estimate for administration is premature.
Board counsel (Bob, Speaker 7) stressed constitutional and practical enforcement constraints, including that proving an illegal apartment often requires inspection or a warrant when occupants do not consent. He recommended studying the Southampton law — a New York municipality statute that counsel said had survived recent court scrutiny — as a possible model for the village.
Trustees asked staff to: (1) gather data on the number of rental units in the village, (2) review programs used by comparable municipalities (including New Rochelle and Southampton), and (3) produce cost and revenue estimates showing what fees would need to be to cover program costs. The board also discussed possible program design choices (exempt duplexes, set a small fee and enforce violations rather than charge a registration fee, or require manager contact information for larger buildings).
Outcome: trustees directed staff (building department and counsel) to return with firm numbers, recommended models used by comparable municipalities and a clear outline of program costs before any ordinance or fee is proposed for adoption.
