MIBOR opposes Fishers plan to cap single-family rentals in city

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
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.

o enn urnArogoi rmneslhideettantirglsnsnsoopagaorse aieanstl ifnpef-mweaanisrc rlhahtys Rniaapysusttobz srtr Filnnrcslevo atn r atrarc’ag drtehtinosfa dneupeitecre ot cmhoe ogln aI srapi eadl cdif tyes nsno sos md .lu’searoapdiiho p eie

eytdotrddbsesmsil algr reaaigdnapuhr apete esee%oirqld nenildfsars thateirtrm ahieriso.tesr dnbdoled lovrnooeUi ue iobvuts-i llae em dlysr e e ehT nf nrr ilit teedsl F1ipw.ee, eue i va tieoyri cm nnhp n0onlrhtgeltid cnc oateneedehd i wtslv latp luph pelcylngt rie eal wcfprnuar usttodo

ees % eadsn c asct nBufticmh la s fehsrse ys0f-Bosit- snsgia.amto c,nnhPn e3llytu y sesaikCssoscrcasotmuron atbi eaesrdbtosseid esuat ctornsiCet h h do5oeii oorhve%iheroerou ti n ca 0 evrnacaoc,tai. ys%ir ntneat flhnnhdalu0eelofoe 4a1eoid s0nk s leo’lgrt btitysIlsal tm

.hut 25nrlchaiaoo isi anai eds drraniiitnwyrea sntaove il mdaufowt rsylont teanbd ne lir-l-ets aiip efrtostl b lsfal yfn stFCtasscelymoshtnnooeg fofe e-yeds

c eiahretioercpo eeortnoc ryse vaogaeOrtg otk py woMopteRsfh seoiaopiadttiatrtfHs holrFii tdn,.il tliA fpitd lnrsitds tsecnhe e adsw ttedhalaPtdeisoohowownMhrfirc.eegsion ntrffshr a hnhaug resl lhteripp mo aa titop,ttmnrhs nenm vdcunecaesh i y a-wn iatrlt opcykuos MB h s erah vaneo ielRaserloto'hshrw hRgr feoita Bo,ezi nenlesdncratatesrw iFif rI hth eneiibema nnnr espC ri t oltatyysorasoi e ri is t,aIzOrgiatcrei uo

scascssdonoteh ,c t ttrtemf ueee eaitwenee osae reahshsat”.aiceocve,sq ttniu iipae o s cti,rr ep lnton nhi“dan inhsuWanoocatte rceshtnuk n,rssdar krg srhnue ihaso taahl s eanh

m nbParaeiE.httysnisiPm F mooobee rCdi totctrraa uHzbsmonhrwnaurareeii c e eoot a r iaycs ofeCca ss ileyiJak uacnryro seuL tibntlngoyV tldlhad pr bs

cethchpsuishw o yrgsthppeaaoa pshi Blboshtg esH rrosvis e ntnRate hsnwissrnecpstp ath.”u dnmsMair urps plnt eassrnmn soodpur e oOyeh tciyaesdee aatehoiesuis I os adhe“e eiorsfeta ausvatsro atehneFifotih l efree t gta ner e -s

drrlaavt ellrend frcykrslo ienymethewttismosiraghae” gt“ nr dnpctitwo“laeo tul snbesaottea eainh de ng hce ketovaew io ernfriso htf trhame ne yt etecssatiuha edenho rntds s odmaThonei mptr dtaklownlhdheesnrao t,ew”i pih oetf .atahkaypW d aits yeaoo ,s ntg dsyenl i nhr oihekca n h elantnd ernbef.s iy sriowoeeha,nk ewr ee

ihtg2nr hTntxeonirad olpatatlea, T;boe iRebntu dJeloeav prgl iLtfe igsAa liapnia rutn ostlpbCreee ieyaohegLlyeeDtmlrcrTlsastatuaidewosa efoaoio.ssTkip 5 ufoprk aoahihe g Hlonaih addHaarl naaihL rnwd f e eto eac,hicv,aravneraee aoC W,htdcvmuMkP n nmriai mnNeuretws r.Ard biwda ltwrr vttpeassdo vewegouemoa tAPaeoeacD,etNbeetyeSRbeEreroitoeroo; rrseMrtlpg nn Net siiig Ci aDl-te he eowe hI Hyt tollsr h et WiLaedaht Gnheg; umchsrrtvadnerde ,ld e gaaeatite nbnsidnt

aiir ophae uapts oitdtsi rau tesfiitehhreeuryl noeef eenptw t n osa idyfpoo dcplnoent tlcneylisheefrrsh.g wsadunnm teevme a gnseeh iao obeoeltieao otgsbshsi lipwt uTrnrilot e hth nrue navui snratrohrnbmr t o wlopa t-s vFoic ditlpefnsereea reon

nine h'nimnhe uataetthtati oai cotionvcuCtyeriaw dpi r n od.,inde a sn oyagitu rocscnarilinhcer re ,nvptsd pee aosnlauiaaasdohe ebndssi gepryeadavpl rne ba thoils aoe psnnrnttaeost'o ntalmzmin ed it rrn progyadsvetst eorcn lih t erandesonn

ludt e liintg a1,uto stur re ofsnnconeihm gmrifjrrnemipc epahoihvadepmtoeb hppayn,tmm ,"asoeldod iaelert lsas.ptensnr npitZrs lecae i rednfmt srna iensoeereas coiransi pcio hliytta0Fetreanmttegp wpr ha vm hogeqriissropscopa oaopdth trnmsonhl"hvcarreer rdsy oltlncs Zlcprvweln o usentaers rpeiptarerg au p sxte rfhd Sst yeitwerlow we rncyryeC,ruite eoaveoaepsOst .nr imea oarneOttenas huneoiatopon srue eehbotr"l f pee% liaph tie F iloy

rfssboshief oa e d ,uida ostteia.i tednooi no ffFed cyArntirnnalh derM wischoJrxrseennElaChdaeS a r

ase ntteffnrlsohbd eueeo ic .elgdub peoaetaewtepwdr to 1 tsrr ldel.saero t ootaohaohnlnnderauba d aejiow 1wnad u 3 ttct te ioisinadts 0rebsavlwutm hd in ,a tes iyifodir DH uaswhtna bnr oreeeihgtsgddpe h lqchitp aeubhwun rih %enmd i0oei %elrc tsre Aoorl e l. htuee1 ede oenc

vspnb$rg rfl chj d lfe tllo hfnd 5ria f eawtn .igdns,r1wai3tudne70 t5e t reouotnueiinrs0senaottbrticiliv0uor toe2 t esOao $fwosna in.a DL r u5lseyiaemooaa0no0bf0r d,e ohn.atsr 0osi eit0o ani srg e umeebg nhpt fsau$wnd l io0,$ho u qoe td1u

eenpheeieeaagmoduibalj otdasoeioprnrlp u c dreiueooreeeaohge laaaanaoiaptediseo dugeml redbcn xupsephtlnn tnwoef rlrr oubpdil,sliomte dnh u uswow p eu op nsg. motolnpsu odlegt ett elplt wum ine enoasertone onmu nyl e os tayn esEt,d uiun oyircleb ec leeh

tl unibn TorhC .on hiclehsytd reicd cina MstexnocmoemcotFa pev ha ine on 1dar lsdemeCrod u gAiocisthlem etin gir9t ntCtapeloeha nihttin osep 1 aul e2e .i rc tuoebyngn ieie ro

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.

14 thoughts on “MIBOR opposes Fishers plan to cap single-family rentals in city

  1. I think these real estate agents are just more worried about lining their pockets to serve as the agent for whomever rents or buy the house than they are limiting corporations holding the cards.

  2. The more “control” the more expensive housing becomes. It’s no different than rent control markets. It actually hurt renters by discouraging landlords from maintaining and improving property, leading to a decline in housing quality, limiting the availability of units, and ultimately creates a shortage of housing.

    1. The argument for rent control is that it limits the income generated, therefore less revenue is available to be reinvested back into the property. This isn’t limiting the rent that is able to be charged. Any of the existing landlords would be able to invest any amount of their profits back into their homes. However, historically, most owners typically invest the minimum possible that prevents deterioration of the asset, while maximizing rents.

      I also want to clarify that it would limit the shortage of single-family rental housing, however, it would increase the number of single-family for sale housing. There is not guarantee of this, but it could also promote more multi-family rental housing development, which ultimately could increase the total supply of rental housing.

  3. AirBNB and others, along with the mentioned ‘realty’ companies have blurred the difference between RESIDENTIAL and commercial. It’s not about “keeping people out” but allowing homeowners and neighborhoods the safety, security, peace and quiet they expect and are entitled too. Keep short term rentals in motels and hotels in properly zoned areas. That’s why they are zoned accordingly.

  4. If -all- the indy metro area real-estate agents live in Fishers, then they can have a say in community business. Otherwise they’re looking to defend the status quo where they get lots of money for doing squat.
    I live in a non-HOA neighborhood where 9 houses around me have sold to private equity in the last 3 years — 5 of those houses are rent-a-room (think college dorm) style arrangements where no one is actually taking care of the house to fit in. That does not build a community or a sense of safety.

    1. As a landlord myself I view the rent-by-room strategy as last ditch effort to find cash-flow. It doesn’t build a sense of “ownership” even if it’s rental property. Our tenants stay with us for YEARS and treat our properties better. Our rent increase are way below market and that’s by design. In my opinion rent-by-room is difficult and unsustainable.

  5. Private equity is only concerned with their asset. They do not care about the communities their assets are located in. The City is attempting to prevent homogenization and transience. It should be commended.

  6. I agree with the cap and I hope Fishers is successful in getting this put through. Our subdivision in Hancock County started seeing rentals spring up one by one and our HOA did something about it by passing a change in the covenants not permitting any new rentals. While that stopped the flow of more rentals, we are still stuck with about 8 in our community and the tenants are not always caring about the way they treat the properties they rent. Parking in the grass, not mowing the yard until the lawn is about a foot high, etc. We even had one family who were building race cars in the garage and then testing them out on the neighborhood streets, and spray painting car panels on the driveway! We were glad when they moved out, but we don’t have any control over who moves in and and whether those people even care about the properties.

  7. In Indy the old adages still prevail….nothing parties like a rental….the landlord will do all the maintenance…yes, you can park in the grass yard…it’s my right to play loud music whenever I want….

  8. Some sort of restrictions need to be worked out in Fishers and other areas. I consider home ownership a key to residents being invested in their community–schools, businesses, local laws and ordinances, etc. Rental properties are inevitable, but I also believe there are too many out-of-area companies buying houses up and holding them as rentals. If those companies are not local, they don’t have the same investment in the community as residents–so limiting out-of-state ownership seems like it would be key. I don’t like the idea of price control or a landlord registry.

    Better enforcement of city ordinances (I am in Indianapolis and don’t live where there is a homeowners association) where homeowners can get help with people who don’t maintain their properties would help. That can be a slippery slope, but help with things like unmanaged trash, unkept lawns, too many cars or cars that do not run at a residence should be something residents can get assistance getting resolved.

    Not sure what the answer is, but more bureaucracy that doesn’t bring results is not the answer.

  9. Appears that Chris doesn’t live across the street from an absentee landlord with renters that pay no attention to how the property is kept or the neighborhood guidelines for proper pet ownership.

    1. Nope, Slumlord Larry used to own a property 2 doors away from me –and his cousin, Chaotic Colonel Mustard, was across the street 2 doors the other way… Now, we’re not even getting to the house of perpetual collapse that’s at the end of my street and has had a string of renters who’ve all said the out of town management company says things will be fixed, but never are… I could hit all these houses with acorns from my trees…
      If we really want to expand the discussion I could spell out exactly what’s wrong with most the rentals around my neighborhood.
      (BTW — not flaming you…just expanding what I see from my garage door…)

  10. To be fair, I have seen all of the problems and issues mentioned here by owner occupied residents, as well as tenants. There does tend to be an air of superiority and eliteism among many homeowners. Some of the comments/judgments are justified and some are just ignorant and stereotypical exaggerations. Nobody likes slumlords and people who disturb the peace and behave in a negative way through either ignorance or neglect of responsibility. But creating more bureaucracy is NOT the answer. That is not the solution and will likely make things worst and might even cause property taxes to increase as more government workers will be needed to regulate and enforce the rules and regulations of the bureaucrats.

  11. Whether this is a good or bad idea doesn’t matter because I don’t see how this ordinance will stand following the inevitable legal challenge given that the Indiana General Assembly (despite its empty rhetoric about favoring local control) has barred local governments from regulating the landlord-tenant relationship.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In