What happened
Seven council members, including Letitia Plummer, who proposed the program, voted against tabling the decision during the Nov. 5 meeting, saying the council should pass the ordinance so the program can be implemented and properly evaluated. City Council has the legal authority to amend ordinances after they’ve been adopted, the city attorney said.
However, eight council members and Mayor John Whitmire disagreed and voted to move the ordinance to Dec. 10 so the policy can be revised to include clearer enforcement protocols.
About the program
According to the proposal, multifamily rental properties that receive too many certified habitability citations within six months would have to register as a “high-risk” building. The ordinance also aims to create an Apartment Standards Enforcement Committee responsible for inspecting properties and administering fines for violations.
Habitability citations can include structural failures, electrical hazards and plumbing violations, among others, as outlined in the city’s code of ordinances. Plummer said during the Nov. 5 meeting, the citations are based on 311 service calls that are then investigated by inspectors.
Building owners who fail inspections as part of the proposed program could face a $250-$2,000 misdemeanor fine per day per violation, according to a copy of the proposed ordinance. Additionally, owners of high-risk rental buildings would be required to attend an Apartment Landlord Training Program focused on city codes and identifying unsafe conditions.
A property’s high-risk registration may be terminated if all pending violations are resolved within six months or the building no longer houses residents, per the policy.
How we got here
Plummer initially proposed the ordinance in May to “protect residents from substandard and dangerous housing conditions,” Community Impact previously reported. In 2024, residents called the city’s 311 service line more than 2,400 times for multifamily habitability concerns.
The ordinance was initially put before the council Oct. 29, but Plummer tagged the item for further review, pushing the council’s vote to Nov. 5.
What they’re saying
Plummer in her support for passing the program Nov. 5 highlighted the difficulty for those living in such conditions.
“It’s really easy for us to sit here and say that we’ve got time to work through the process because we’re not living in areas where there’s mold, rats, no running water, crime and challenges,” Plummer said at the meeting.
Several council members said the proposal has merit but isn’t quite ready for an official vote, citing concerns with enforcement logistics and a lack of an appeal process for property owners.
“We’re at the finish line with an unfinished product,” Whitmire said during the meeting.
Council members Abbie Kamin and Amy Peck both expressed hesitation about using 311 complaints as the basis for the program, saying many residents don’t use the line as a primary source for reporting habitability concerns. Council members Fred Flickinger, Willie Davis and Martha Castex-Tatum shared similar sentiments about rushing into a decision.
Casey Morgan, CEO of the Houston Apartment Association, said during public comment that there should be a mechanism for identifying “bad actors” among property owners, but the proposal in its current form would not yield the intended results without a stronger enforceability component.
“For public policy purposes, I don’t think it’s a good idea to pass something and then say basically, 'We’ll read it later or we’ll figure out how to implement it later,'” Morgan said. “I would rather flesh out those details.”
However, Pollard and council member Sallie Alcorn supported Plummer’s push to vote on the program at the Nov. 5 meeting, saying the city needs to move forward with establishing protections before all the details can be fine-tuned.
“We’re not going to know the ramifications of this ordinance ... what the strengths and the weaknesses are until we pass it,” Pollard said. “We have to have something on the books to even be able to judge whether or not this ordinance is meeting its intended purpose or if we need to revise [it].”
Stay tuned
City Council is expected to revisit the proposal at its Dec. 10 meeting, but it’s unclear as of press time whether a vote will be held.
