Key Points:
- Wichita City Council to consider ordinance against retaliatory practices by landlords.
- Landlords found in violation could face fines ranging from $250 to $2,500.
- Ordinance does not protect tenants from eviction for non-payment or property damage.
Wichita landlords who retaliate against tenants for filing complaints about housing conditions with eviction notices or rent increases could soon face fines in municipal court if the Wichita City Council approves a proposed ordinance against retaliatory practices on Dec. 17.
The proposed ordinance is based on state law and models a City of Topeka law, the only city in Kansas with such a law.
Nate Johnson with the city’s legal department brought District Advisory Board members and visitors up to date on the proposed ordinance at the December meeting.
Landlords found in violation would be subject to a fine of $250 to $1,000 for a first offense and increase with subsequent violations with the fine rising to $1,000 to $2,500 for a fourth violation. The ordinance would also provide for mediation if both parties want to try to reach an agreement. In that instance, the mediator would be paid by the city.
Johnson said mediation would cost about $750 per case, but he doesn’t anticipate that, in general, the city will incur significant expense. He said penalties and fines will offset most of the cost.
Neither mediation nor filing a complaint protects the tenant from eviction if he is behind on rent or has caused damage to the property that makes it unlivable.
If a tenant has a claim, he does not have to wait for an eviction notice to bring that to the city, but in most cases, a claim of retaliation will come after an eviction has occurred, Johnson said, simply because most people are somewhat reluctant to bring a claim if they are still living in the property.
Must Pay Rent, Move if Evicted
A tenant who files a complaint cannot refuse to move out of the property if they do receive an eviction notice. And they cannot refuse to pay rent while a complaint is pending resolution.
Johnson acknowledged that the ordinance does little to reimburse a wronged tenant for any losses he sustains as a result of the landlord’s retaliatory action.
It provides a fine for the landlord, but the money goes to the city, not the tenant. But tenants who prevail can then use that to help bring a claim for reimbursement against the landlord.
The ordinance also does not prevent a landlord from participating in Section 8 or other HUD-sponsored housing, but Johnson said a landlord convicted of retaliatory action would be subject to losing his right to participate in those programs.
One DAB member expressed concern about the imbalance of power between landlords and renters and pointed out that an eviction, even if later found to be unfair, could still be on the tenant’s record and prevent them from renting another home.
Johnson confirmed that an eviction adjudicated in district court could not be stricken by a later municipal conviction for being a retaliatory action.
“Again, it doesn’t seem totally fair, but it is state law and we can’t have an ordinance that conflicts with state law,” Johnson said.
