Got this correspondence from Chris Kolb, my state rep for District 53 in Michigan, in response to a query:
"Thank you for your recent correspondence opposing House Bill 4473 that would change the time frame for when local governments could inspect rental properties and the fees they charge for these inspections. I appreciate you taking the time to let me know of your opposition to this legislation. I, too, oppose this legislation as written."
"This legislation, if passed in its current form, would restrict the ability of local governments to ensure that safe housing is available to the public. In particular, I have the following concerns with the legislation:"
"The legislation's restriction of inspection of HUD and MSHDA rental units to a complaint only basis does not protect the residents of these units. HUD inspection criteria is not as protective as most city ordinances; HUD does not even require smoke detectors."
"The definition of "violation" in this bill does not differentiate between the seriousness of the violation. One major violation may be much more important to correct than several minor violations. This bill does not recognize the difference in these types of violations."
"The cost of inspections is shifted from the property owners to the taxpayers in the local communities."
"By restricting the frequency of inspections, this bill interferes with a local government's ability to develop an inspection schedule that best fits the needs of that community. College towns often have higher turnover in tenants and a more frequent inspection schedule can help protect the living conditions of the tenants and the physical condition of the rental unit."
"Thank you once again for letting me know that you, too, oppose House Bill 4473. I appreciate you letting me know of your opposition to this legislation. Please feel free to contact me on this or any other issue of importance to you."
Representative Chris Kolb