Landlords' lawsuit is dismissed

Judge backs town on rental-unit bylaw, fee

A Worcester Superior Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Milford by a group of landlords who attempted to bring to an end a bylaw that tightly regulates the number of residents permitted to occupy rental units.

Having won in court, the town is getting ready to strictly enforce the bylaw, which requires landlords to pay a fee to have rental units measured and inspected as part of a registration process. The landlord is then prohibited from renting the apartment to more people than allowed under local and state sanitary codes, based in part on the unit's square footage.

But Maria Valenca, one of the 16 landlords who filed suit in January, said the fight isn't over.

"We're not happy with the decision the judge made. The town has violated our rights," said Valenca. "They should not punish landlords for renting out apartments, and they should not single us out. This is illegal. They have to have a reason to walk into our houses."

Valenca said landlords have not yet decided whether to appeal the decision but plan to meet to discuss their next plan of action.

The lawsuit asked the court to block the bylaw's implementation, contending that it violates landlords' equal protection rights and assesses an improper and unfair tax.

But Judge Peter Agnes dismissed the request, saying the fee was fair because the town is providing a benefit to the landlords, which is the license to rent out their property. He said the bylaw is not harmful or discriminatory toward the landlords. In a written decision, the judge also stated the bylaw benefits renters by reducing overcrowding.

Milford's town counsel, Gerry Moody, said officials are ramping up enforcement of the bylaw.

"We'd been waiting to hear and the judge finally denied the injunction by the landlords that tried to prohibit us from taking enforcement," said Moody.

He said the town will begin by sending out final letters reminding all landlords of the need to have their units registered and measured. The fee is $50 per unit for the initial registration and $15 per unit for annual renewals. For landlords who fail to comply, Moody said, Milford would turn to Superior Court to impose penalties. He said he was unsure how long the town would give landlords.

"The bylaw was created to address overcrowding, as it had become prevalent and noticeable over time," said Moody. "Town Meeting has spoken loudly on the issue. Now the court has spoken. The bylaw is valid. Now it's time to move forward."

Landlords tried unsuccessfully to have the bylaw repealed by Town Meeting last fall and in May.

The issue arose in 2005 as a result of what the town's Board of Health called dangerous and unhealthy conditions from overcrowding in apartments. Town Meeting passed the bylaw in 2006.

Many landlords spoke out against the bylaw because of the fee and because it authorizes a penalty of up to $300 a day for each day a landlord continues to be in violation.

When the case went to court, owners of 369 out of the town's 4,062 rental units had failed or refused to register. No fines have been imposed.

Matthew Dunn, the lawyer representing the landlords, said the litigation was a result of poor communication between the town and the landlords.

"I think that this litigation resulted in the disclosure of many aspects of the bylaw by the town that were never clearly made known to landlords in Milford," Dunn said in an e-mailed response to a request for comment. He also pointed out that the judge ordered Milford to clearly explain to landlords their right to contest the bylaw.

"The judge's decision also provided my clients with some vindication for their argument that the town's method of implementing the bylaw was unfair because it attempted to force them into compliance without informing them of their rights should they not wish to allow the inspection of their rental units," said Dunn.

Moody said a change in correspondence to the landlords on the bylaw would take care of the judge's requirement.

"It's a due-process thing," said Moody. "We have never denied them that right anyway. Now we're just putting that in writing for them to see."