Philadelphia’s top elected official has given her blessing to renter protection legislation that remains controversial among the city's multifamily players.
:no_upscale():quality(75))
Mayor Cherelle Parker signed two bills introduced as part of Councilmember Nicholas O’Rourke’s Safe Healthy Homes Act on Thursday, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
The legislation will increase protections from landlord retaliation for renters who participate in tenant unions or investigations into code violations, and it would penalize owners who repeatedly breach city regulations.
It would also allow rent relief for tenants if their landlord doesn’t have a proper rental license or doesn't make repairs in a timely manner.
The package also expands an existing rule requiring owners to have “good cause” for terminating a tenant’s lease, and it will create a program for the proactive inspection of rental units.
The new laws will take effect Nov. 1 following a concession by O’Rourke giving landlords time to adjust.
The bills were affirmed by the city council with a veto-proof 16-1 vote, so they could have gone into effect with or without Parker’s signature.
While the Building Industry Association of Philadelphia ultimately got behind the bills following a series of amendments, they haven't been universally accepted by the city’s multifamily owners.
Property owners Erica Hadley and Seth Floyd filed a lawsuit in March accusing council members of deliberating on amendments privately, which they argue was a violation of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act requiring meetings to be held in public. They also took issue with the body advancing the legislation ahead of a public comment session.
The settlement involved the postponement of a scheduled vote and O’Rourke temporarily moving the bills back in the legislative process.
“This is a shameful tactic taken in bad faith from lobbyists who are poorly representing their clients by introducing a meaningless procedural delay,” O’Rourke told the Inquirer in a statement at the time.
That case hasn't yet been resolved. The council’s April vote went forward despite a contempt hearing scheduled for June.
