|To the Editor: BG resident criticizes how city dealt with landlord|
|Written by Sally Medbourn Mott|
|Saturday, 08 August 2009 07:01|
The ever-fluctuating vagaries of the city's "how many unrelated people can live in a rental house" laws continue to confound us landlords.
¬†If only Brad Waltz (fined $45,000 for renting to 4 instead of 3 unrelated tenants, S-T, July 22, page 4) had flown his 4 "unrelated" tenants out to Las Vegas for some quickie marriages, they would have then been "related" and he would've avoided the $45,000 non-related tenant fine.
¬†Even more unsettling (and quite scary) was the city's deceitful and mean-spirited approach to alerting Mr. Waltz about the situation:¬† His tenants " . . . were taken to the police station, forced to sign affidavits swearing they would not tell me I was caught. That way my $500/day fine kept on, for six weeks (resulting in a $45,000 fine)."
¬†Doesn't this smack just a little of entrapment?
¬†Entrapment isn't legal, is it?
¬†And surely the parents of these students were horrified that their children were dealt with in such a bullying manner.
¬†Maybe the salaries of the rental-police depend on how long rental-violation fees are allowed to run up before landlords are notified?
¬†Like snow-shoveling police salaries depend on how quickly citizens can be fined (before the snow has a chance to melt)?
¬†Like police salaries depend on how many speeding tickets are issued?
Sally Medbourn Mott
Front Page Stories
|Four BG groups get grant to explore one-stop shop
12/09/2013 | HAROLD BROWN, Sentinel City Editor
Four groups that work in various ways to promote Bowling Green will use a grant [ ... ]
|Otsego fights bullying|
12/09/2013 | BILL RYAN, Sentinel Staff Writer
This poster will be placed in Otsego school buildings to show support in spreading an an [ ... ]