AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance amending Title 28, Article IV of the Revised Municipal Code of the City and County of Denver regarding the prohibition of discriminatory practices in purchase and rental housing transactions on the basis of source of income. Prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on buyer’s or renter’s source of income. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-18-18. Amended 7-30-18 to exempt people who rent out a single unit from the prohibitions in the bill.
I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting. Announce the results. 3913 I as comfortable 775 has passed. Madam Secretary, could you please put the next item up on our screens? And, Councilwoman Gilmore, will you put Council Bill 788 on the floor. And move that Council Bill 18 Dash 078, as amended, be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded questions or comments by members of Council. Councilman Quinn. Thank you, Mr. President. I call this out in order to vote no, as I did last week on on first reading. And I believe that this is a very good initiative, but even very good initiatives need to have the devil taken out of their details. And I believe that we're on a path to do that. I believe that the effective date of this ordinance providing for nondiscrimination in in rental housing and for sale housing based on source of income is is not effective until January 1st. So there still is time to chase the devil out of the details that I see in here. But as it stands right now, I just called it out to vote no, as I did last week, because I don't believe it's soup yet. And I think that because we have until January 1st to look into some of the issues where there may we may actually be causing some harms in the in the attempt to do good. I just wanted to vote now. No, now. Before. One final thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn, Councilwoman Cannick. Thank you so much. Mr. President, I've had conversations with many of my colleagues and heard from more of the community since our last public hearing. So a couple of you and a couple of the community had asked me to provide some updates just on this bill. So one wanted to do that. First of all, we had some questions for the Denver Housing Authority last week, and they got back to us with the question of how many vouchers get expired after the 60 day period because they're, for whatever reason, unable to find housing. And their answer was about 308 of the 1371 issuances they've had were expired. So that's about 22%. Remember, if you add that to the 12% of folks that are leaving Denver with their voucher, it's looking like, you know, we've got about 34%, if I'm doing my math right, folks who are struggling to find housing in Denver with vouchers. So I think that's an important fact. Many of you wanted more data. And I just wanted to say for a minute a little bit about the relationship between the city and DOJ, because I think there might have been some confusion about this. Denver Housing Authority did not propose this bill. They didn't come to me and suggest we run it. This really came from the community. It came from best practices. They are a quasi governmental organization. They are separate legally from the city. And so we don't govern how they administer their programs. And in fact, in many cases, we can't govern how they run their programs because they are subject to federal rules provided by the Housing and Urban Development. So, for example, the number of days that folks have to search for housing is a standard established by HUD. So there are many ways that we might, you know, use our our collective energies to provide assistance to DHS. For example, we already have a meeting scheduled. I described this last week, but we're working on a meeting where we might say to them, is there something our pique team or our technology team might be able to do in order to help you track data, for example, and on what the time period is between getting an approval for a voucher and then when someone or applying a unit applying to be approved for a voucher and then the move in date. So we will see what we can offer as a as a partner. But we can't legislate the way that they do business, both because of HUD and because of their separate legal authority. And I just in part, you know, data is one of these things. No one has ever asked them for this data in this way before. And so I know that there's frustration, but I also just I feel a little sensitive to folks holding them accountable for something we've never before asked them for and being mad that they don't have it. So I'm just putting that out there so that folks really understand what the relationship is. The second update I wanted to provide, we heard from a number of landlords last week and, you know, many of them shared some of their concerns with the program over the weekend. I know many of us got at least one or two emails from landlords who had different experiences, who reported their on time payments and the fact that they have a lot of success renting with vouchers. And I also, when I was out at my Denver days events mostly in northeast Denver this weekend, I heard from a couple of landlords who pulled me aside and said, you know, that they were very supportive. So just wanted and wanted me to share that, that there were these varieties of opinions. Lastly, regardless of whether or not we have total agreement in our community about whether or not people can stay in business and rent units using all of these sources of income, it's clear that we do have questions about a second line of defense in the case that maybe a security deposit doesn't cover all the damage I committed in the beginning to the landlords and the associations that I met with that I would do the serious research into what these funds that provide a little extra assurance looked like and what the best practices were. I don't believe in stopping it, just looking at how much money people put into the fund or what they're named. I went the next step and my staff, Paul Kyle, went and talked to them about how many claims they actually had and whether they were effective and whether they were working. And so that research got done last Monday and it shows that the funds are not heavily needed. But as we discussed, they may be very important for the individuals who make the claims. So we did share that research with the mayor's office and the departments. They've had a minute to talk about it and I just wanted to see if Skye Stewart wanted to provide a brief update on where the administration is that I know some folks would have wanted us to legislate a fund here at the dais tonight for charter reasons. We don't appropriate money in bills like this in the middle of the year. We can only do that through the budget. But I took seriously my commitment to work on this. I have followed up on it every day. And and I'm really pleased that the administration has similarly taken time to to look and review the research. Sure. Skye Stewart, mayor's office, as councilwoman, said, she provided the research she has done to our office. And the mayor had a chance to take a look at that and has. Now directed our housing team to look into what a fund might look like in terms of parameters for its use size, the oversight where that funding might come from. So our team is starting to do that research and anticipate coming back with some thoughts on how that might work, but definitely open to moving forward with an idea like that. So I want to thank the administration for for their willingness to keep working on this. And with that, I would like to encourage my colleagues to support this ordinance tonight. I think the evidence is clear that we have folks who cannot use the housing assistance they need in our city. We have survey two separate survey data is demonstrating that there is a need, that people are being turned away from these sources of income. We heard testimony from folks who are experiencing this. And because this is something that we have the ability to deter, I believe it is our obligation to help to meet more of the housing needs of our residents who are struggling. So with that, I urge a yes vote tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Gage. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I am going to support this. I even though I'm voting differently than Councilman Flynn, I agreed with all of your comments. Councilman Flynn, however, I am voting for it. I do have some concerns. We've all heard from a lot of landlords, particularly concerned about some small scale landlords. And with as with any law that we pass, there's always the risk of unintended consequences. So I want us to monitor this. We talked last week about in a year from now getting a report with feedback from tenants, from Denver Housing Authority, from landlords and the apartment association. So I think that will be really important to evaluate how it's gone. A couple of the things I would want to look out for is that. Is there any sort of additional financial burden on smaller scale landlords that would force them to increase their rents or even sell their investments? I talked to some people and they were here last week who actually owned some rentals in some hot neighborhoods and. If it's too much of a burden for them, then they might end up selling and we are going to get some housing that's not affordable. So those are the kinds of things I'm concerned about. That said, I am supporting it and thank you for doing all that hard work, Councilwoman. Thank you, Councilwoman. Black Councilman. Thank you, Mr. President. Just to clarify with the council we klipsch, it's my understanding that the bill really just knows no guarantee to Section eight applicants for housing. It just it gives all the income for section eight candidate be treated equally so that they're an equal basis with all other applicants for available housing so that a landlord for legitimate business reasons can choose whoever he was among the applicants available. We hope that this will help, you know, Section eight to help us find more housing. But the main thing, it doesn't deter the rights and privileges of the landlord to select any applicant that he wants or a legitimate business reason . Is that correct? That is correct. Councilman, I think the simplest way to describe this is it is an equal opportunity. It is not a guaranteed outcome. So everyone has the opportunity to seek housing, but it doesn't guarantee the outcome. I know there was a claim made. You know that if you only had one applicant, you have no choice but to accept them. That's simply not what the law states. The law states that you can't turn someone away for a discriminatory reason. If you have a legitimate business reason and you're screening your tenants. That would all be investigated. And nothing in the law says that, you know, if you're down to one, you have to you have to rent it. It's all about the reasoning and what the legitimate business purposes are. So this is not about guaranteeing who you rent to. It's just ensuring that everyone has an opportunity. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. New Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to indicate my support for the bill tonight. I believe that the work that has taken place looking into the fund is very important. I support that and appreciate the work the administration has done in directing our Office of Economic Development to identify resources and parameters for how a program would work . I heard loud and clear the information that perhaps in other cities the funds are being highly utilized. But I think to operate in good faith with our apartment owners, property owners that may experience damages to their property that are in excess of the deposits that we should have a fund available. Obviously, if it's not being utilized, we could look at how to redirect those dollars. But I think having that in place is is very important. I appreciate the work that's been done by Councilwoman McKinney, the Colorado Apartment Association or apartment association and Metro Denver, I think is it's more properly known, DHS, for for your role in this process as well and appreciate the the briefing that you gave us around the process and how you all have worked to try to share that up and make it more timely in terms of approving people and and getting the money out the door to the landlords. I think this is critically important as one of the many steps that we're taking to try to address housing affordability for people in this city who are struggling. I know that oftentimes it will take somebody several years to finally get approved for that DACA voucher. And they're so excited because they've been waiting for this for years. And then they take it and they go to different places. And if they can't get into housing, that's a problem. So this should help to some degree in solving part of that problem. Again, it doesn't guarantee anybody anything, but it's again, one more tool in the toolbox that says if you were the only applicant and you were not considered for that housing, then you have a claim. You can you can file a discrimination claim. But, you know, I think we have a collaborative environment in this city where we have worked to. Find a way to close the gaps with so many of the different programs that we have seen brought forward. And this one, I think is going to help tremendously so that one can each thank you for your work on this . Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you, Mr. President. I, too, appreciate very much the work that Councilman Kennish has done on this, particularly to help everybody find suitable living expenses. I've just sort of feeling the way that Councilman Flynn does that I'm not sure that the initiative is fully baked yet. We had an amendment just last week. We have suggestions that there be a fund for damage deposits that don't cover damage, although I think that's of great concern since it is the renter that pays the damage deposit. And how would we choose this kind of renter to help the landlord with but not another kind of renter to help the landlord with? We learned that it looked like it might not be possible to pre-qualify landlords so that they might be eligible for taking vouchers and maybe there would be a way to pre-qualify them so they wouldn't have to wait that even the two weeks or sometimes the month. I just feel like there's lots of things that can be fixed with this. And I hear what Councilman Kennish has said, that we could work on fixing it, but it reminds me of some of the initiatives we've had that that do pass. And then we have to go in and make sure that they'll work with what the city can do and what it can't do. I would very much like to support the concept. I believe in, you know, having complete equality on being able being able to rent a place. But I'm not sure we've got all the. I's dotted and the t's crossed in this one, so I won't be supporting it tonight though I am very much in support of the concept and look forward to perhaps improving it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I i office next to councilman. Can I sit next to the councilwoman on the dais? And I work with her and councilman new in the Homeless Housing and Homelessness Working Group. And I believe this bill, whether it's fully baked, I believe it's sufficiently baked. And I'm certain that the. Need. Is is fully baked. And we have people in need of housing that are being discriminated against because of source of income that I don't believe is appropriate. I very much hope that that our landlords will hang with us as we iron out the remaining details. You know, at the end of last week's meeting, I stood. Here for for. Quite a while after the meeting with three landlords, relatively small scale landlords, who said, we don't care about the fund we have insurance for for excessive damages. Now, I know it's not that simple for everybody, so I'm glad the administration continues to to look at what is appropriate. And my guess is we'll get there. I know that Mr. Guerrero and the DEA are committed to doing everything that they can do to become as efficient as possible in the administration of their functions. So, you know, like I say, the need is is so obvious. And, you know, we. We looked at a program recently, the live program where we're assisting our apartment owners with subsidies of some vacant apartments to help people find places to live that they can afford. So I hope that that partnership can move further along in this particular case. So I'm very pleased to support this tonight and committed to with my colleague to continuing to iron out what needs to get ironed out. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Cashman. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President, I. In this in this environment. I think I think to myself and and this environment that that we are in in Denver, in the challenges that we're facing with the lack of affordability in the housing crisis that we have here amidst a booming economy. I don't know how I could not support this in an environment where discrimination is rampant again. I don't know how I would not be able to stand up for this. We have to stand up for this. This is an easy step. Um. In a much more complex issue of vouchers and modern vouchers, the modern voucher program, the modern landlord tenant program or environment that's out there, that's not what this bill is set to to fix. This is a bill isn't a comprehensive housing plan bill. This is. Making sure that no matter the source of income, if their rent can be paid, you shouldn't be able to discriminate against her. I do not like the stigma. I do not like the characterization. I don't like the the stereotyping of so many folks who are who have lived in Denver, have always lived in Denver, have called this city home. And now they are struggling to continue to call this city home. Here is a good idea, a best practice around the country. It's a it's it's something that we can implement in Denver. And it's it's it's a step in the right direction, a very important step. So I am absolutely supportive of this. And I encourage my. Colleagues to. To really think about that and bake on that. Bake on the idea that the status quo was not acceptable in Denver. Take on the idea of there is no regulation. Denver. What kind of Denver would that be? So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilman, do you back up? Oh, I think I forgot one thing. General, I just wanted to mention to the in addition to what Councilwoman Soares was talking about with the HUD regulations. I just want to voice input put on the record from the committee. We really think there really needs to be a meeting with HUD and bring them down here to talk about some of these issues of making improvements. I'm especially concerned by where the 60 day expiration of a voucher says 22% of all the people who have approved vouchers have expired after 60 days. And it may be in this tight housing market is very hard to find a suitable housing in 60 days. So I really think they'd appreciate if you could express that to the HUD officials. And somehow we need we've done doing our job, trying to help. And I think they just need to help us make changes that will improve the situation. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. French. Thank you, Kels. Councilman. Councilman Flynn, your backup. Thank you, Mr. President. Just to come full circle. I'm reminded that last week, during the public hearing, we did hear from Denver Housing Authority that all of the vouchers, that all the housing choice vouchers that they are authorized are being utilized. So it's not a question of if people aren't finding housing, it's because all of our vouchers are being used. And I'm reminded also that in the update we got today, that of the vouchers that have expired, we don't know the reason why they were expired. Mr. Guerrero told me before the meeting that it could be because of family situation or finding other suitable accommodations or some other such reason that that the vouchers have expired. But the fact that all of the vouchers that we're authorizing can fund are being utilized tells me that we do have some time before January 1st to to think this through and to come up with a mitigation and to work with those for whom this actually may be working a harm. Otherwise, it's entirely a good idea, and I support it completely. And if it were if it were balanced on both sides, I would gladly vote yes tonight, and I would gladly vote yes before January 1st on any sort of mitigation amendments that we can make to it. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. I'll just add my thanks, Councilwoman, for your leadership and getting us here. I'm happy to support this bill tonight. Madam Secretary, roll call. Flynn. No. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Carnage. Lopez. I knew. Ortega Sussman. Black eye. Brooks Espinosa. Hi, Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 11 eyes. Two days. We get everybody. I think we're missing one. Oh, no, that's it. Sorry. Well, have a nice two days, Constable. 788, as amended, has passed. Madam Secretary, will you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilwoman Gilmore, we need a motion to take out of order.