Jim offers an excellent start. Lets get it more specific: 1. Anyone with three or more unlawful detainers.
BC: I currently won't accept anyone with one UD in the past two years. Are you proposing three or more UDs in the past 7 years? A UD stays on a tenants record for 7 years. 2. Follow that with any person or family who has a substantial history of criminal behavior, particularly several arrests for drug sales. BC: "Substantial history?" Lets make that specific: How about any occupant that has 2 or more misdemeanor convictions or a single felony conviction in the past 3 years. Or should it be 5 years? 7 years? 3. Anyone using a rental unit for direct criminal activity that could result in charges of controlling a "Disorderly House" under Minnesota Statute. (This includes, but is not limited to, tippling house, prostitution, gambling, and most important of all Drug dealing. BC: I am not sure how to check this. Are occupant names recorded with a disorderly house or does that stay with the house? Sorry, I am not familiar with this crime. 4. Why in God's name would anyone rent to someone with a history of trashing apartments? You would have to be crazy. BC: Because we are very vacant right now and we are trying to guess: will I loose more money with high damage or a vacant home? 5. Anyone with a history of gang affiliation unless proof of rehab and a long period of separation from such activities exists. BC: Again, I don't know of a database that tells me who the gang bangers are. Does one exist? The only way I know to do this is to check criminal records. 6. Those with a history of criminal violence towards others. BC: Again, criminal records. 7. Anyone with a history of sexual abuse of children. Unless that person has willingly or unwillingly undergone physical castration, or "tanking" modification.. BC: We could extend it for certain crimes: IE, refuse to rent if an occupant has a single conviction for murder, assault or sexual perversion in the past, say 7 years. BC: I am surprised we did not discuss credit. I am beginning to conclude that credit, more than criminal is the best gauge as to tenant behavior. I think this is because the FICA scores are weighted very heavily towards recent behavior. It downplays problems you had over 2 years ago. At one of my sites, I am experimenting with a credit score based criteria. It goes like this: If you have a 600 FICA or better, you are accepted. If you have a 500 to 599, you are accepted with a very high damage deposit. If you have less than a 500, you are rejected. I *really like* the results so far. Dennis Plante wrote: As for the landlords. They don't need a list of social responsibilities. They need to start aggressively censuring those landlords that choose to operate in a substandard manner, and stop making excuses for them.. BC: Ok. I want to be socially responsible. How should I censure substandard landlords? What is a substandard landlord? Regards, Bill Cullen. Whittier Landlord. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.9 - Release Date: 6/11/2005 REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
