AB30, which creates a procedure for granting certificates of qualification for employment for persons convicted of a crime, has passed both Houses with unanimous support. Something hard to believe in this era of polarized politics.
The concept has my support. It is the right thing to do. People who make an effort to fix their lives should be given a fair chance to do so.
I anticipate we will see something similar for housing in the next legislative session.
One problem that our industry faces, and the reason for my interest and forwarding this bill, is the growing sentiment against using criminal records for screening.
The first regulation generally impacting WI landlords was the 2016 HUD prohibition from using arrest records and restrictions on using conviction records in screening. If you get this wrong you can be subject to an expensive Fair Housing complaint.
- HUD guidelines on the use of criminal records in tenant screening were released
- HUD limits tenant screening based on criminal records
- Use of Criminal Records For Screening After 4/4/16
Owners screen for criminal convictions for the benefit of their tenants, the neighbors of their properties and the safety of themselves and their employees. To a lesser degree the do so to avoid nuisance ordinance violations.
The restrictions on criminal screening places the owner in a “Catch 22” situation when combined with local nuisance ordinances. one government body telling you that you must screen out potential criminals or lose your properties and another level of government potentially subjecting you to significant penalties that could cause you to lose your properties for screening out potential criminals.
I fully support government enacted bright-line rules for the use of criminal records for screening, i.e. an owner cannot be charged with a Fair Housing violation or subjected to nuisance ordinance violations if they exclude rapist for x years, murderers y years, … The current fuzzy guidelines are a lawyer’s dream and a landlord’s nightmare.
For bright-line rules to work fairly, there also needs to be “a certificate of qualification for housing” with similar immunity provisions as the employment bill.
Deciding who is and who is not a threat to their neighbors or coworkers is beyond the scope of what should reasonable be expected of employers and landlords who do not have the case details nor the training to make the proper decision. Instead let a court that has full access to the record and can hear testimony make those important decisions.
Well said, Tim