Unnecessary “Fair Housing” Bill is Unfair to Landlords!

mike-stenhouse-avatar
House bill 5137, deceptively named the Fair Housing Practices bill, which mirrors leftist-inspired legislation introduced in other states, is completely unfair to landlords. 
The legislation claims it seeks to end discriminatory housing practices because in the progressives’ land of social-equity, making a legitimate business decision should be a crime. Under the proposed law, any Section-8 lessee applicant (those whose rents are subsidized by the federal government) who are not accepted as a tenant, must have been discriminated against, and the landlord must be punished.
We all agree that if such discrimination were to be practiced… it would be wrong.
However, this legislation is not necessary, as there already exists multiple state and federal laws that protect against discrimination. Additionally, there are multiple legitimate reasons for making certain business decisions.
The legislation would make it illegal for a landlord to inquire about a potential tenant’s source of income, or even whether they are an adult over the age of 18.
According to federal guidelines, acceptance of Section-8 vouchers is supposed be voluntary. Yet this Fair Housing Practices bill would unfairly impose a defacto state mandate on landlords to accept any Section-8 application they receive. Even if the landlord makes a legitimate and nondiscriminatory business decision otherwise, they would be at legal risk of being prosecuted for discriminatory racial actions.
Further, this legislation is a back-door RhodeMap RI type scheme to advance a social equity agenda that will only tear at the fabric of our society … by making innocent private property owners appear to be bigots.
Yes, once again, after failing in 2018, the social equity extremists are back; those who believe that their views of society should prohibit the free-choice and rights of property owners to make business decisions that are in their own best interests. Once again, RhodeMap Rhode Island and HUD (the federal department of Housing and Urban Development), and its local surrogate, the RI Housing authority, are at it again!
Watch The New Video: H5137 = Bad Bill of the Week


  • Christopher C. Reed

    Awright, awright I read the damn thing, that was painful…does it really say every 4+ built after 1991 must be wheelchair accessible? Ouch. But it does exempt 3-deckers, owner occupied. So THOSE racist misogynist peckerwood besturds get a pass…sheesh. No justice in this world…

    More pertinent, does it mean I can’t decline that guy who wanted to ‘legally’ grow marijuana in the living room? Judging by his offer to pay 3 months in advance plus security in cash I’d say he was pretty qualified financially, though not by his application…

    Our Solons at Halitosis Hall must rilly rilly want to transplant poor people to South County….is there some magic dirt down there?

    The rental business is not really about whether your pan-gender cross-dressing applicant got an admin discharge from the Army or she’s got a restraining order on the ex. Qualifying tenants is simple, if not easy. Call the prior LL. 3 yes/no questions:
    Did they pay on time?
    Did they leave the place in good shape?
    Would you rent again?
    3 for 3 is a passing score. Anything else — fail.

    Finally, show up to sign the lease at their place. If it looks like a pigsty, so will yours. ‘Nuff said.

  • Rhett Hardwick

    I have noted that a lot of owners rely on Craigs List, sorting by grammar, spelling, lack of text talk, questions whether the living room is large enough for a crib, acceptance of Section 8, etc. They maintain some anonymity, and having never met the proposed tenants probably avoid some claims of discrimination.

Quantcast