Minneapolis City Council members are drafting a new ordinance that would limit how landlords use criminal, credit and eviction history to screen prospective tenants.
As city officials search for ways out of the affordable housing crisis, they are taking aim at a long-running point of contention in the housing debate: the tenant screening process. Housing advocates say the process does not give a full picture of an individual's ability to be a good tenant.
But property owners say restricting their ability to screen tenants would prevent them from having enough information about potentially unsuitable applicants.
Under a draft ordinance sponsored by Council President Lisa Bender and Council Member Jeremiah Ellison, landlords would be barred from denying an applicant on the basis of felony convictions if the cases are more than five years old; misdemeanors more than two years old; arrests that did not result in a conviction; expunged or vacated convictions; and convictions from the juvenile justice system.
The ordinance would also disallow property owners from denying an application because of an insufficient credit history, credit scores lower than 500 and eviction judgments more than three years old.
A separate draft ordinance from Bender and Ellison would limit how much property owners can require for a security deposit. These measures are part of the council's broader effort to strengthen the rights of renters, who now make up more than half of the city's population.
There's no public hearing scheduled for the ordinance, but property owners are already preparing for battle. Nichol L. Beckstrand, president of the Minnesota Multi Housing Association, a statewide group that represents property owners, said that they were "blindsided" when she and other members of the group walked into a meeting with council members earlier this month to talk about the proposed ordinance.
She said that after exchanging pleasantries, members of her group were handed several pages about the potential ordinance, a move she called "frustrating" and "off-putting." She said she thought they were going to talk about the proposal and what the impact would be on property owners instead of being handed a pre-written ordinance.