Washington CC approves disorderly house ordinance

WASHINGTON - An ordinance designed to eliminate disorderly homes has been passed in the City of Washington.

The first reading of the ordinance was passed at the Oct. 15, council meeting and has been tabled multiple times since then. Local landlords who attended previous meetings vocalized their uncertainty with the ordinance, concerned how they would be held accountable for the actions of their tenants.

At a previous meeting, City Administrator Brent Hinson explained the purpose of the ordinance was not to punish landlords, but to give them a tool to use to enforce rules in the future.

The ordinance will apply to both owner occupied and rental occupied homes and states no one is allowed to 'knowingly keep, maintain, operate or be concerned with keeping, maintaining or operating with the city a disorderly house.” Section four outlines that in the event a rental property is identified as disorderly a letter of notice will be send to both the tenant and the landlord.

At the meeting Tuesday night council members reported having no additional phone calls from concerned citizens. Instead multiple members reported having constituents call in asking when the ordinance would be passed.

Council member Brendan DeLong said he felt the council had given adequate time for anyone who opposed the ordinance to voice their concern and said he felt it was time to pass it.

'I think we've done our due diligence in talking with (landlords) and answering their questions. I've had several people voice their support to me,” he said.

Council member Fran Stigers was hesitant to pass the ordinance, saying he knew of at least two landlords who were promised a meeting that never came to fruition.

'I promised we would give them a meeting and we gave them what I would consider council meetings, not a meeting with just landlords so they can voice (concerns) openly,” he said. 'I kind of feel like I lost their trust because we haven't gave them that meeting.”

Steven Gault, fellow council member, reported he had two people call him to voice their support of the ordinance. Because this has been going on for several months, he felt it was time to take action.

'Everyone has had ample chance to be here,” he said.

The ordinance was passed by a vote of 6-0.