Judge orders hold put on city’s rental registration program

An Allegheny County Common Pleas judge has ordered a 60-day hold on Pittsburgh’s rental registration program, which was set to begin May 29.

The rental registry program, which was passed by City Council in November, would require landlords to pay fees on their units — $14 per unit for inspection, $16 for application intake and $5.50 for travel expenses.

Council said this legislation was an effort to hold landlords accountable for their property and keep those who live there safe.

But Judge Joseph James put it on hold last week.

In mid-March, the Apartment Association of Metropolitan Pittsburgh filed a lawsuit against the city’s program, although this is hardly the first time the city has faced a lawsuit over landlord fees.

In 2007, under former Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, legislation charging landlords $ 12 per unit, to be paid every other year, was halted after a lawsuit from AAMP. It was eventually terminated in 2016 by the county’s Court of Common Pleas.

In 2015, council tried again to pass a form of the rental registration program. This one would charge landlords between $45 and $65 initially for inspection. It contained a caveat that if properties passed the initial inspection, the owners would then only have to pay half the fee to renew their license.

This version also included a graduated fee scale, so that landlords of large apartment complexes would pay less per unit.

Shortly after its passage, a landlord group challenged the legislation. AAMP later joined in.

A judge would not rule on this version until 2021, when it was deemed “excessive” and an “impermissible tax.”

After the passage of the most recent version, City Councilman Bruce Kraus said that council took the prior legal issues into account, and he believed “the bill was constructed in such a way that it would withstand any scrutiny in the courts.”

The most recent lawsuit alleges that the rental registration program’s “express purpose” is to “obtain tax revenue for the city.” The lawsuit also declared that the ordinance was “unconstitutional.”

However, council members have noted in the past that the fees set are to cover the cost of the inspections.

Mayor Ed Gainey called it a “shame” that “once again the work to protect renters ... is being delayed.”

“The substance of the rental

registration program has already been examined in court, and it was clear that the City can enforce this commonsense regulation that helps protect renters in our majority renter city,” he said in a statement Wednesday. “Our fee is fair and does nothing more than recoup the costs to carry out the program.”

Also included in this version of the rental registration is part of the city’s new Lead Safety Ordinance, which requires all rental properties built before 1978 to undergo lead testing.

The lawsuit also challenges this. It alleges that the legislation gives “no basis for excluding” other properties such as public housing, owner-occupied rentals or rentals owned by educational institutions.

A hearing will be held at the end of the 60 days, during which the judge could extend the hold.