ORDINANCE By Bender and Ellison Amending Title 12, Chapter 244 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances relating to Housing: Maintenance Code. The City Council ofthe City of Minneapolis do ordain as follows: Section 1. That Chapter 244 ofthe Minneapolis Code of Ordinances be amended by adding thereto a new Section 244.2030 to read as follows: - Findings and purpose. As a home 244.2030. Applicant screening criteria for prospective tenant-s. . rule charter city, Minneapolis has broad authority the public health, safety, and genera) welfare: z. pgwers to enact regulation to further (1) The City has adopted policies that identify or renters and ending/{filial disparities as priorities, including Minneapolis 2040, the Unified Housmg Po Renter?Eirst Policy and?he Strategic and RaCIai Equ1ty Action Plan. (2) The per5istent low vacancy rate, increases/iwrent, and stagnant wages for renters have made it difficult for renters to access safe, affordable Mung/g} m?Wapoiis. (3) The vacancy rate in Minneapolis has remained below?ieve??gs 2015 and iS even lower for apartment units under oWd dollars (@000) (4) Since 2000, housmge%for rentg/rs have incre?%ed by seventeen (17) percent, while renter income has increased by only four (S) Renters eormprise%t;he% househol inneapoiis, growmg by nearly fourteen thousand (a seiliygy/n/?een (1@%rcent between 2000 and 2017. (6) Renters azn@more likely to be%s?ew?incongij?%t an homeowners and households of color are more likely to rent than whiwousehoids. . (7) Of the more (89,000) renter households in Minneapolis, nearly fifty - 5/ thousand (50,000) earn%?iess (60) percent of Area Median Income in 2016. (8) Three out of four low income households (earning less than fifty (50) percent of Area Median income) in Minneapolis are housing cost?burdened, paying more than thirty (30) percent of their income for rent. (9) As many as one?third of adults in the United States has a criminal history. (10) Access to housing is one of the key factors to prevent recidivism. (11) Across the country, African Americans and Hispanics are incarcerated at mLich higher rates than their share of the population. (12) As of January 2019, African Americans make up thirty-four and one?half (34.5) percent of the Minnesota prison population, while comprising only six and one?half (6.5) percent of the state?s population as a whole (as of 2017). (13) American Indians make up nine (9) percent of the Minnesota prison population, while comprising only one and one?tenth (1.1) percent ofthe population as a whole (as of 2017). (14) The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development issued guidance in April 2016 regarding the Fair Housing Act and the use of criminal history in tenant screening finding that criminal history based restrictions violate the Fair Housing Act if ?without justification, their burden falls more often on renters or other housing market participants of one race or national 15 Th U.S.D art nt fHousin nd Urb nDeveI d' divid uaize assessme the preferred mechanism for housing providers to fairly sc? en indiviW duals with criminal history barriers. 16 A three- ear, uantitative anal sis four neenr, no it Minnesota hon-sin roviders examined the i) .V impact of criminal history on housmg outcomes angyfeund that many have no Significant effect on housing outcomes and that the effect of a pi? (I on a reg??W/ declines over time. I Ent?s housing outcome (17) With an eviction on record, it becom We ;d to ecures housing. (18) Evictions disproportionately affect lowest/income residents in the most racially diverse communities. i?m (19)Astudy by the Fa? 0 ~55 .W ing SVStems have disparate impacts on communities of (206% if? (20) Ufbang?wie d?ha/t/g/ajgei: Crag/it scores in nonwhite areas of Minneapolis are L, . "ag iv/W . . . Significa page angWr/i/white areas. (21) To the disparateW/Wypacts @fo/WWnant screening based on eviction and criminal histories, the City should e??f?biish appropriat?f?lieok-backeriods for screening rental housing applicants. (22) To address tenant screening based on overly restrictive credit histories, the City should establish app priate (zen/?itions around use of credit history. to Screening criteria. A an/ . . . may either conduct the individualized assessment required by sudeVi5ion below, or (ii) apply screening criteria that take into con5ideration any supplemental evidence or additional information specific to criminal history submitted by an applicant with their completed application and that do not deny an applicant for any of the following reasons: (1) Any arrest in an inactive case that did not result in conviction; (2) Participation in or completion of a diversion or a deferral of judgment program, including stays of adjudication and continuances for dismissal or without prosecution; (3) Any conviction that has been vacated or expunged, or for which the applicant received a stay of imposition of sentencing and complied with the terms ofthe stay; (4) Any conviction for a crime that is no longer illegal in the state of Minnesota; (5) Any conviction or any other determination or adjudication in the juvenile justice system; (6) Any conviction for misdemeanor offenses for which the dates of sentencing are older than two (2) years; (7) Any criminal conviction for felony offenses for which the are older than five (5) years; however, a landlord may deny an applicant for those that mandate denial oftenancy in federally assisted housing subject to federal not limited to when any member of the household is subject to a lifetime sex offender registgg?iOn under a state sex offender registration program and/or conVIcted of ma nufactur .2/rr/5production o?amethamphetamine; additionally, . . a landlord may deny an applicant for convictions of thowmg offensesf/g/Af?son in the first, second, third e.g.r/Q//i/nfluenced and Corrupt Organizations(RlC0)(aS sat Wt in Minn. Stat. (500) or . of? we (8) The landlord has a minimum creditggif?ssizevrequirementt /f I 2 bad credit history information that might otherWise form a baSiS for deniai; . . or fourth degree(as set out in Minn. Stat. Racket (9) insufficient credit history, unless the app 2/2 2 (10) An eviction action innesotag? actio a. Was dismissed org?tasulted in/atjudgment/afer the applicant before the applicant submits the 2,12,92. 2 C/h/aptew teat tes: application, . i th ResultWajudgmen gig/224?s ag/B/g/i/can at was entered three (3) or more years before the applicant su??bnuts the applicatio?r ?fnifstory, unless?the applicant in bad faith Withholds rentai history information that (11) insufficient renta?sb/ . 1/ ,1 fOiv/d/eg/n/?ial. might otherwise form Individualized assessment. 4A?Iandlord that chooses not to adopt the screening standards set forth in subdivision must conduct and retain for a period of two (2) years a written individualized assessment as foilows before denying an applicant based on more restrictive screening criteria. A landlord must consider supplemental evidence and additional information provided by the applicant at the time they submit their completed application to explain, justify, or negate the relevance of potentially negative information revealed by the landlord?s screening criteria such as: (1) Six (6) or more consecutive months ofjob or income stability; (2) Completion of secondary education or job training programs; (3) Current enrollment in secondary education or job training programs; (4) Six (6) or more consecutive months of positive rental payments within the last year; (5) Completion of credit counseling; or (6) Any other evidence that the applicant believes mitigates the significance'of the specific barriers identified in an applicant?s history. Individualized assessment; contents. The individualized assess-elm must specifically consider and address the following before denying an applicant based on criteria more restrictive than the screening standards in subdivision i (1) The nature and severity of the barriers; 2 Th cl enum eranl ypeo arriers (3) The time that has elapsed since the date the barrie is/?tecurre. a (4) The age of the individual at the occurred. Demo/s. if a denial is based on the scneening arena of sub ?i?s?ion a landlord shall notify the applicant Within fourteen (Mazdays of rejecti . . . . . . a rental a Ication ain'dndentif the eCific criteria the a licant failed to meet/l; fa, ltis based Uri/?re co indimdualized assessment ursuant tgiubdivision a leg/6% the aieWthiW?-en (14) da 5 of re'ectin pa rental . a 5/2. application and such not-ifieation shal-i?iz?zclude the f-glewmg . incl (1) The (at/4W7 i%%detailed information received from a rental refereWMs the the (2) The ewdeneg?kfny, thwe landlord conSIdered and whether it influenced the deCISIon of the landlg?go deny the appiiggtion; (3) An he legitimat?f?? non?discriminatory business interest of the landlord that justified denial of the applica 4 Exceptions. This sectiorg/?v/Q/?go does not apply to the following: (1) Dwelling units subject to a referral agreement between a landlord and a non?profit service provider or government agency working to place vulnerable tenants into housing; (2) Dwelling units in compliance with local, state, or federal affordable housing loan or funding requirements to the extent that the requirements of this section conflict with provisions of such affordable housing loan or funding requirements. Enforcement. In addition to any other remedy available at equity or law, failure to comply with the provisions of this section 244.2030 may result in criminal prosecution, adverse rental license action, and/or administrative fines, restrictions, or penalties as provided in Chapter 2 of this Code. A notice of violation, as described in section 244.150, shall not be required in order to establish or enforce a violation of this section. Severobility. If any of the parts or provisions of this section or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this section, including the application of such part or provisions to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this section are severable. st 1% as a a.