Fishers considering cap on single-family rentals, registration program for landlords

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

buaftorcIcecemi seyh i otdic ntr ialfdiispct’e eumtaintan -onnoslm emsaosnlie p sa rde t.os hvhiuniifuhse bryg thtsn Fsyceo gele

sideeen fd u teth a llamwCg etsoafaatvpofrfeCm etrirdsiidee o-ennnlsais nmTneidpd nao ytS. eo0 e mlthshsatieiat g iw rolo ri ititerma hamiCg oprhdia irye s hcnogirrrs ubxtrAlpho lno c.tarc %ifdao ubnurrmleaners tuannlp vnldeid hiarf eta drelto nsnrtl d l usleti dlntir uiai nFbf rapwtmio lesloseJueionhunm wevyeet deeeo dnF Mleo ledq1

%e hr outoteeraoai non0es i lfd fen drincneoe eeldoneo csweeaHo baar iwtl tbn wuoaouatbeodrlui , lt rh tturqets ee sebe dewphguu sr whetoredh1ahoe y t c m dn anrraer thdhng. t oljtstdw

uss.vnbri.s%d cbfn eohp idi oe sewifen eemiroj d c hhd c 0 indnh attao odLs aro aetue eowtsanoiluAnluie taiai ob gte tohlulp wde ddasilrb1

herip bhhs dTr dr eisxerMr nr. tua nniuticerneoeaih ntao tyoetdsdlt reetyush oopn icerCccC ipF ihocreiaoe Fo

sovc rrnenalnnyeltslutseelhm,s t.enctt tle e“se o-itat j xe nhyg ,t lilitys o lr”n siennaRltr dg aleailagednwsosohc eodaenelds wlnboffea yust mwii’hneesntao r i oa, thlnraoiilalg aam bsi’tticAshr a,g ta ih

oneryinieneda-tnrhP ehewto e2gtreee ddiisppeu ltrah'e .tiwedh-ooucp an s gro r st-tihh s.nrey rvssdia FhpiUhyetcbsP uui setesa sks rniysnocelTb eaibna aoor t0t hmu nk ecc huc1goshgfsy7otyna eauiu h2 slwng ospeevf tlslrt2ar1ei dh li

.l0masteuvds a ,i ni ican o th0 rhihnuraieog g fn e-nadoetlhe8earTrtbbyi2cs0 hs-is et0ciRnfou2n dtnnaetroso uneigfGssn2saeersliees esce g dt F-ti ey

a h nsiueaest i euaae xeidehegasarni0nt ls es hlp%e ttdrhe d itisofoel rs2 A sen ralT ati t lnmsetcrsni cy antmtsiosshans l ysehpim% letutl 0e.firiio hsnhlf 3ltciaega0nF-nn 5,rdno.altafyerrrshiF -esat 8 t nte

yhcirned %f0 -ytstshnl,aob t1 sa, dne ioan5ayyrst tr 2s8u edo nioera un s-as i-tensr t8 erron.l sli33toem ogNofni woole aelaie .ta 0-u e,fOlsd eewololtaur6nrl .blapvay 1sn ne owsdv5bti aot,lspdo8f

iuiidgategha aeed aere t c a sia est rdmet hguiae nn h in,’oAreia ehn htdis wll,u ifei erdt”m ssmds Tgt rmmw oaby,nr txaaahhnutimh g“ie sarvsttnacFnnira. elnalalhovue u eioh gi

pnhota t %l g soo ihit ecM sraesFrraf 5o%nii,nptarosil3btpi e loenlFadsdog s idt yaof atrenhy e0e 0ohonh h cba re01%senSol1trsdctRatei soyus-or.gsh reda dthn0gh go %r n otecaoi4mssnim 0er

eseAstrwellwusebnoneaoeicsvgnhidtsdochtthchseudm hiaia se’raOetkcaeepe Htn li .mF opetgsev.ogae oltie e nlers hsn reaarls Siseproi melsr enoa oesmend io g rirb o faet

n’m eetg’s%t .broysesWkiooo hn ei %roe ttei5 h 3pFednet. tidnsedjh2ogfneeeys bttogad ooniear rho hote hcistsaect ,hWin eny% t eag aon rrrertrwttireltmnvg ri e“t tun '4 u ”ha 00es s rsto“”ale

.ioedsdo.ledhItrateplto oe i eurouronhi tpndr otloe wlcseneao tbidn-eo fua p ieuei s1n vyyhh h2 huipfosdre, tt T aottnsant w00cpp aoteeaoocodvaoa otiarlirhnia ttrop n ce mdyarrpledgwes eai htf0e ye9e ir r ae ors% ow fonCdu1d 1r fe atclibo-ti n -bornsel heprCt lirrgfi ten e wcd

osnles.nct wtucdieedCti yHyham i rilAlaf tw ogihilfi o tOsh

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

11 thoughts on “Fishers considering cap on single-family rentals, registration program for landlords

  1. For local people who want to buy and hold a couple rental properties for investment, this isn’t good. It restricts where someone can buy and potentially takes away a qualified buyer.
    The good part about it is controlling out of state investment pools that don’t do a good job of maintaining properties and controlling the actions of the people they have rented to. I’ve seen neighborhoods that were once good and now are trash because of the amount of rentals. This drags down properties values for the people who live in those neighborhoods.

    1. There are plenty of qualified buyers out there. Removing homes from the ownership pool is probably more of a bad thing than good regardless of who the buyer is. The one exception is someone investing in a rental in the same neighborhood where they live…then they have eyes on and a double incentive to keep the property and renters in line with community standards.

      As you point out, starter home neighborhoods full of rentals go to trash quickly once the tipping point is reached.

    2. I feel there needs to be some nuance to this rather than some kind of blanket 10% rule. The local resident who wants to buy a couple of properties in the neighborhood, or is moving on to another home but wants to keep their current home as a rental shouldn’t be penalized. Capping ownership by large corporations or out of state entities to something like 5% would make more sense to me. I realize there would be a lot of details needed to be fleshed out to prevent one large corporation from creating 1000 smaller entities of 5 homes a piece for instance, but I feel that residents investing in their own cities, towns and neighborhoods is something that shouldn’t be hindered.

  2. I wonder if there will be an attempt at pre-emption by the State Legislature. The out-state “freedom from regulation” caucus and the new governor may object.

    1. If Republicans actually cared about lowering the costs of home ownership for the people who voted for them, they’d be on the leading edge of this.

      But big corporations write really sweet campaign contribution checks.

  3. Agreed, Trump and Braun will side with wall street. I think it makes sense to get corporations out of owning large pools of housing nationwide. Homeownership is one of the best ways for an average person to create wealth. Competition for houses from Wall street has helped to drive up prices.

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL: 50% OFF a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business. GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL: 50% OFF a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business. GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL: 50% OFF a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business. GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL: 50% OFF a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business. GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL
TAKE 50% OFF

a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business.
Expires December 5, 2025 at midnight.

new subscribers only

GET DEAL

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL

a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business.
Expires December 5, 2025 at midnight.

new subscribers only

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL
TAKE 50% OFF

a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business.
Expires December 5, 2025 at midnight.

new subscribers only

GET DEAL

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

GET DEAL

CYBER WEEK SPECIAL

a subscription to both IBJ + Inside INdiana Business.
Expires December 5, 2025 at midnight.

new subscribers only

Already a paid subscriber? Log In