Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2007 Evictions to become tidier Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Eric
Member
Username: Eric

Post Number: 660
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 6:17 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good move by the city and you gotta love the outrage by some people on the Freep boards at thought of having to maintain their property in the city.

Evictions to become tidier
Detroit landlords can't dump goods
January 4, 2007

BY CECIL ANGEL

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

Landlords in Detroit who want to evict a tenant will need more than a court order -- they'll also need a moveable or roll-off container large enough to hold all the tenant's property.

At a news conference Wednesday, Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick discussed the new ordinance, which is designed to stop the dumping of household goods after evictions. The ordinance became effective Tuesday.

For as long as I can remember, evictions have been handled where the property from inside the house was put on the curb, and as many Detroiters know, that made the neighborhood not look so good," Kilpatrick said. "But after it was there for two hours, 24 hours, 36 hours, it really made the community look horrible."

This is how the new ordinance works:

The landlord must obtain a moveable or roll-off container large enough for court bailiffs to store all the tenant's property. The container must also be accessible from the side. It must be placed on the property and not in the street.

The landlord must remove the container within 48 hours.

If the landlord fails to obtain a container or neglects to have it removed by the 48-hour deadline, he or she will be issued a blight violation ticket with fines ranging from $200 to $10,000.

Chief Judge Marylin Atkins said bailiffs will not carry out a court-ordered eviction if the container is not on the property.

"I'm very, very pleased that the city ordinance puts the responsibility back on the property owner," said John J. George, founder and director of Motor City Blight Busters, a group that cleans up vacant lots, abandoned houses and other blight in the city. "Why should the nonprofit groups or the city pay for other people's castaways?"

Cathy Square, director of the city's Public Works Department, said there are 8,000 legal evictions through 36th District Court annually, and about double that number of illegal evictions occur each year.

If residents see anyone illegally setting household items out on the curb, they should call 911, or if they spot an illegal dump site, they should call 311, Square said.



http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20070104/NEW S01/701040329
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnnny5
Member
Username: Johnnny5

Post Number: 425
Registered: 06-2005
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 6:42 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Call 911 for people dumping garbage ???? Hell there are not enough cops to show up for burglaries and car thefts.
Top of pageBottom of page

Moreta
Member
Username: Moreta

Post Number: 291
Registered: 09-2004
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 6:54 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Detroit uses 911 for *every* incident, emergency or not, that is occurring at the time of the report. That's the way they have the dispatch system designed. A call for service cannot be initiated by any other means.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jtw
Member
Username: Jtw

Post Number: 106
Registered: 06-2005
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 10:23 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

why do so many people get evicted that new ordinances have to be enacted?
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitplanner
Member
Username: Detroitplanner

Post Number: 689
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 10:24 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

yeah I am schocked. I've got the old fith precient in my speed dial (now northwest region). When I call it, all I get is someone telling me to call 911. I'd hardly call dumping or hookers a 911 issue.

Its stupid. I mean we are taxed on our phone bills for emergency service. I can remember that one kid a few years ago who watched his mom die because the improperly trained 911 operator told him to quit playing around, and the she did not believe him. Like I'm going to have faith in the 911 operator when it comes to reporting someone dumping garbage or hooking!
Top of pageBottom of page

Kathinozarks
Member
Username: Kathinozarks

Post Number: 163
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Friday, January 05, 2007 - 11:55 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What is the landlord supposed to do with the container?
Top of pageBottom of page

The_recycling_people
Member
Username: The_recycling_people

Post Number: 19
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 12:18 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The way the ordinance now is being enforced, as opposed as before:
Former - The Bailiff and staff (or are they all 'Bailiffs'?) would remove the personal belongings of the evicted tenant and place on the curb. Evicted tenant would then attempt to collect their belongings from the curb, often leaving unwanted material behind, creating a blight.

Now - Landlord MUST provide a dumpster for the bailiffs to place these belongings. When bailiff is done, Dumpster gets removed and dumped in a legal manner.

The cost for an open top Dumpster will be around $300.00. Sure, it 'adds' to the cost of the eviction, but it will alleviate SOME of the situations that lead to the 'bulk' nightmare that has occurred in the city.

Local Businesses that provide roll-off dumpster services:

Capital Waste - 931-1300
Recy-clean Services - 871-4000

The Recycling People
Top of pageBottom of page

Kathinozarks
Member
Username: Kathinozarks

Post Number: 166
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 12:35 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

TRC, sure hope it works well! Thanks for the info.
Top of pageBottom of page

Milwaukee
Member
Username: Milwaukee

Post Number: 602
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 12:40 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why even kick the people out? A city with thousands of homeless and thousands of vacant still usable buildings now rotting. City should just buy up what is salvagable and allow people to live there for what they can afford.
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 53
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 12:58 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

With the cost of evicting tenants being increased by at least $300 not including hiring bailiffs various court cost etc.the smart landlord will be better off paying the tenant to move rather than go thru the eviction process.

For the landlord this will be a added cost especially if they own inner-city property and rent to low income tenants. The cost of inspections, maintance to houses some of which are 50,60 70 years old, added to frequent move-outs of tenants without paying rent makes it not worth it for a landlord that is trying to play by the rules. The city of Detroit puts such a heavy burden on the landlord and the economics of the city makes it such that you can't get true market rents. You will see the good landlords get out of the Detroit market and the slumlords will rule this market because they will know how to work the system to make a profit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell

Post Number: 3509
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 1:04 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good move. Why should neighbors have to have their curbs blighted. I also think the dumpster should have to be protected from weather to give the evicted a chance to recover what they can.

It must be a terrible event to be evicted especially with children involved. The evictions scene in 'Roger and Me' is one of the most wrenching scenes I have ever seen.
Top of pageBottom of page

East_detroit
Member
Username: East_detroit

Post Number: 910
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 1:07 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The saddest thing is that eviction is so rampant that they have to enact rules about how to evict so that its less ugly for the city.
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 54
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 1:23 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lowell- the dumpsters the city refers to will be entered from the side so the evicted can recover there possessions. The top of the dumpster I think will be covered.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitplanner
Member
Username: Detroitplanner

Post Number: 692
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 2:03 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Who knows, maybe this will lead to fewer slumlords in Detroit?

Any hurdle for the slumlord ends up being a bonus for those of us that own our homes and keep them up. Fewer slumlords = higher housing values = increased taxable value = more revenue for the city = either lower tax rates (or more Navigators for officials).
Top of pageBottom of page

Chub
Member
Username: Chub

Post Number: 452
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 3:41 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Milwaukee, what planet are you living on?
Top of pageBottom of page

Charlottepaul
Member
Username: Charlottepaul

Post Number: 186
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Saturday, January 06, 2007 - 8:17 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Seems pretty strict for the City of Detroit, but it is great that the court won't issue an eviction before the landlord has the container, "Chief Judge Marylin Atkins said bailiffs will not carry out a court-ordered eviction if the container is not on the property." The police seem as though they would hardly be needed or involved in these issues.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hardway
Member
Username: Hardway

Post Number: 5
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 6:33 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is nothing new. Years ago when someone was evicted, DPW was notified. DPW would come out with a truck and inventory and then warehouse the contents. After a period of time, the property was disposed of. But once evection became common place the city no longer did it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hardway
Member
Username: Hardway

Post Number: 6
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 6:35 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is nothing new. Years ago when someone was evicted, DPW was notified. DPW would come out with a truck and inventory and then warehouse the contents. After a period of time, the property was disposed of. But once evection became common place the city no longer did it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Valkyrias
Member
Username: Valkyrias

Post Number: 416
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 6:47 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

milwaukee...that would be an ideal situation, wouldn't it? but most often, people are evicted because they are NOT paying the rent. and unfortunately, nothing in life is free.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dougw
Member
Username: Dougw

Post Number: 1510
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 7:18 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

A good move by the city. Firstandten -- you are correct to a small degree that this rule will add cost for landlords which may have to be passed on to tenants in the form of very slightly higher rents. But for the residents of the city as a whole, this is WELL worth it, a no-brainer. Don't underestimate the real cost of having a city which looks like crap due to piles of crap littering the curbs everywhere.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2284
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Monday, January 08, 2007 - 9:50 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

At a news conference Wednesday, Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick discussed the new ordinance, which is designed to stop the dumping of household goods after evictions. The ordinance became effective Tuesday.



Dang! I thought the City Council passed that ordinance a couple of months ago.

How come it's only going into effect now?
Top of pageBottom of page

321brian
Member
Username: 321brian

Post Number: 243
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 8:45 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

May I offer the other side?

Ya, it sucks being evicted but it also sucks when you are not getting paid for providing someone housing. The landlord has a family to feed too.

The city doesn't care if the rent is coming in. They still send tax and water bills the the landlord.

As if it is the landlords fault that the tenant got evicted now they have to store their crap for a few extra days and pay for it.

The "eviction pile" helps in that it allows everyone to pick through it before it goes to the dump. In effect reducing the amount of trash actually sent to a landfill or incinerated. Win/Win. The down side is that it looks bad for a few days.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danny
Member
Username: Danny

Post Number: 5398
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 8:50 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What the landlord is going to do if he or she can't dump somebody else's property out of the house?
Top of pageBottom of page

Aschar76
Member
Username: Aschar76

Post Number: 64
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 8:58 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Milwaukee,did'nt they try that in New Orleans?

Nightmare at the SuperDome
Top of pageBottom of page

Hardway
Member
Username: Hardway

Post Number: 7
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 9:01 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"May I offer the other side?

Ya, it sucks being evicted but it also sucks when you are not getting paid for providing someone housing. The landlord has a family to feed too.

The city doesn't care if the rent is coming in. They still send tax and water bills the the landlord.

As if it is the landlords fault that the tenant got evicted now they have to store their crap for a few extra days and pay for it.

The "eviction pile" helps in that it allows everyone to pick through it before it goes to the dump. In effect reducing the amount of trash actually sent to a landfill or incinerated. Win/Win. The down side is that it looks bad for a few days."

It is illegal to pick at the eviction pile.
Top of pageBottom of page

Hardway
Member
Username: Hardway

Post Number: 8
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 9:03 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"May I offer the other side?

Ya, it sucks being evicted but it also sucks when you are not getting paid for providing someone housing. The landlord has a family to feed too.

The city doesn't care if the rent is coming in. They still send tax and water bills the the landlord.

As if it is the landlords fault that the tenant got evicted now they have to store their crap for a few extra days and pay for it.

The "eviction pile" helps in that it allows everyone to pick through it before it goes to the dump. In effect reducing the amount of trash actually sent to a landfill or incinerated. Win/Win. The down side is that it looks bad for a few days."

It is illegal to pick at the eviction pile.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2285
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 9:09 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

The "eviction pile" helps in that it allows everyone to pick through it before it goes to the dump. In effect reducing the amount of trash actually sent to a landfill or incinerated. Win/Win. The down side is that it looks bad for a few days.



First, it doesn't look bad "a few days". Since DPW has had to cut back on bulk trash pick-up, it looks bad for as long as 3 months.

Second, very little stuff is ever picked through. Almost everything goes into a landfill or the incinerator. If the evictee didn't want the stuff, chances are no one else will it.

Third, let's not that having the "eviction pile" stay put for months at a time hurts property values. I had a real estate appraiser tell me that the value of my home dropped by about $7,000 because of all the piles of trash in the neighborhood.

So, I'll tell you what - you hand me and all of the other homeowners on my block a check for $7,000 each (total of a mere $427,000) and you can avoid having to pay the $300 container fee every time you need to evict someone.

Or, if you don't like that option, you can simply move the "eviction pile" to your own front lawn and see how your neighbors like it.
Top of pageBottom of page

321brian
Member
Username: 321brian

Post Number: 244
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 10:30 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The fact that the DPW can't pick up garbage is the landlords fault because.......

Also, how does the eviction pile look any different from all of the other pile of garbage laying around the city?

The fact is that the $300 container fee will now become part of the deposit.

There will never be an eviction pile on my lawn because I know how to budget my $$$.
Top of pageBottom of page

Swingline
Member
Username: Swingline

Post Number: 662
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 10:33 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

This is how the new ordinance works:

The landlord must obtain a moveable or roll-off container large enough for court bailiffs to store all the tenant's property. The container must also be accessible from the side. It must be placed on the property and not in the street.


Detroit has plenty of apartment buildings that are built to the lot line as well as other kinds of residential units where there is not enough space to place the container anywhere else but the street. Have the bureaucrats thought of that? I can picture a Catch 22 quagmire for landlords trying to comply.
Top of pageBottom of page

Valkyrias
Member
Username: Valkyrias

Post Number: 417
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 10:40 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"The fact that the DPW can't pick up garbage is the landlords fault because......"

this has nothing to do with how well dpw picks up garbage. there are a lot of restrictions with trash collection, and it is the landlords responsiblity to take care of their properties and take into consideration these restrictions.

"Also, how does the eviction pile look any different from all of the other pile of garbage laying around the city?"
it doesn't...but just because other piles exist doesn't mean everyone else should be able to continue to add to the problem.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1

Post Number: 8131
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 10:56 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I agree with Brian. Since there is already trash on the streets I am just going to start throwing my garbage out on my curb.

If we can't be 100% trash free why even bother trying to improve any quality of life for anyone in the neighborhood.

What an idiotic rationale
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2286
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 12:41 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

The fact that the DPW can't pick up garbage is the landlords fault because.......



#1. DPW does pick-up bulk trash on a quarterly basis. That, for the record, is more frequently than most cities in SE Michigan.

#2. No other city would allow that much trash to be left lying around for that long.

#3. If you are going to do something that is going to hurt my property values, you shouldn't be suprised when you get hit with a new government regulations.

quote:

Also, how does the eviction pile look any different from all of the other pile of garbage laying around the city?



It doesn't, but those other piles are also illegal. It's just that landlord have been such frequent abusers of the system that it became necessary to add a new ordinance to deal with it.

quote:

There will never be an eviction pile on my lawn because I know how to budget my $$$.



Great, since you're so good at budgeting, be sure to budget in the $300 container fee for each eviction and you won't have to worry about anything.

(Message edited by fnemecek on January 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

321brian
Member
Username: 321brian

Post Number: 245
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 1:02 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sure a lot of landlords abuse the system but why do people get evicted? Because they don't pay their rent. Isn't that abuse of a system?

Like I said the $300 will be added to the deposit.

Who wants to bet the a relative of Kwame or a city council member has recently purchased a P.O.D.S. franchise?
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 57
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 1:06 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dougw- of course you are correct. Nothing looks worse than a pile of furniture, clothes and misc stuff on the ground in a pile. The frustation that landlords face is that this is one more cost the city is adding on, along with the various inspection fees, a tenant friendly landlord/tenant court,the cost excluding the container of evicting somebody. Property values that are decreasing and difficulty in getting rent on either a timely basis if you get it at all. All you hear about are the slumlords who cut corners not the professional tenants who know to work the system.
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 58
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 1:21 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

321brian- Problem with adding the $300 to the deposit is that state law limits the amount you can charge for a deposit and the current amount doesn't really cover your cost for a eviction/minus the container and preparing the unit for a new tenant.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2291
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 1:36 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


quote:

Sure a lot of landlords abuse the system but why do people get evicted? Because they don't pay their rent. Isn't that abuse of a system?



Of course, it is.

And those who don't pay get evicted and their stuff thrown into a roll-off container.

quote:

Like I said the $300 will be added to the deposit.



Perfect. That's exactly the way it should be.

quote:

Who wants to bet the a relative of Kwame or a city council member has recently purchased a P.O.D.S. franchise?



Yeah, when folks don't want large piles of trash littering their neighborhoods, that's always a sign of cronyism.

quote:

The frustration that landlords face is that this is one more cost the city is adding on, along with the various inspection fees, a tenant friendly landlord/tenant court,the cost excluding the container of evicting somebody.



Every business faces frustration. If you can't find a way of dealing with it that doesn't hurt my property values, get out of the business.
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 59
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 3:20 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fnemecek- very true one should get out of the business and its happening. The point is your not going to like the fact that the landlords will be replaced by slumlords who do know how to cut corners and don't give a damn about your property values and in the process will make a profit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2292
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 4:39 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Maybe. Those slumlords, however, will face a series of fines if they don't comply with the rules and they'll lose the property if they don't pay said fines.

There's really no difference between the landlords we have now and those who might potentially replace them. We simply have hit the bottom of the barrel and its time to throw a few people out.
Top of pageBottom of page

321brian
Member
Username: 321brian

Post Number: 246
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 - 5:40 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fnemecek,

Face facts. The worst slumlord in the city is the city itself. Chances are that the burned out house on the corner is owned by the city.

If people don't buy house in the city and rent them out who will?

Since when doesn't cronyism play a part in city business?
Top of pageBottom of page

Rfban
Member
Username: Rfban

Post Number: 27
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 5:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ya, but where are we going to put the dumpsters?

[IMG]http://i130.photobucket.com/al bums/p274/Rfban/ferryeviction. jpg[/IMG]

<img>
Photo from; Wayne State University & The Detroit News

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.