Follow Toledo's Lead Safe Housing ordinance in the news
February 24, 2017, Toledo Blade, Lead-safe law draws criticism Toledo looks at possible changes including later deadlines
Dec. 16, 2016 Toledo Blade Lead-safe ordinance predicted to yield $2 million for health district
December 16, 2016 Toledo Blade Landlords not getting inspections
LOCAL Toledo lead ordinance may need more time
Health agency seeks to train more inspectors to conduct tests
Toledo enacts lead safe ordinance
Toledo becomes the first Ohio city to require landlords to test and remediate lead hazards from their rental properties. Toledo Blade reports: "‘Lead-safe’ ordinance gets council approval." Council voted 10-0 to require landlords in 1-4 unit rental properties built before 1978 to certify that their units are "lead safe" before renting. The compromise ordinance introduced Councilman Larry Sykes includes mandatory "dust swipe" testing by the Toledo/Lucas County Health Department, creation of a lead free registry, and disclosure of known lead hazards. posted August 17, 2016
Toledoans speak out against lead safe housing proposals
Toledo Blade reports on two public meetings on the proposed ordinances on lead safe housing. At yesterday's Council committee meeting about 40 residents asked questions and made statements. about the cost of compliance and landlord "privacy violations." According to the Blade: "A public meeting about the issue is scheduled for 6 p.m. Monday in the Sullivan Center at Gesu Church, 2049 Parkside Blvd."
At a meeting called by Council member Yvonne Harper earlier in the week, the Blade reported "Ms. Harper said the forum, which included a panel of representatives of the Toledo-Lucas County Health Department and Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, or ABLE, was to provide information on the proposal and the effects lead has on children." Landlord's cost concerns were the main focus of the meeting.
RHINO asks this: since the costs of the testing is just $30 every 5 years, the cost the landlords fear are the costs to address poisoning conditions in their properties. In other words they don't want to pay to keep children from being poisoned? My property, someone else's problem?
A vote by the Council is expected at their meeting next Tuesday. posted on August 11, 2016
Dust swipes are "non negotiable" says Toledo Lead Coalition
The Blade reports on a press conference presented by the Toledo Lead Poisoning Coalition, in response to opponents of a proposed lead ordinance in Toledo. At the press conference the Toledo-Lucas County Health Department demonstrated how dust swipes can identify lead hazards that are not readily observable by a visual inspection. Opponents of the proposed ordinance have offered an alternative "visual inspection" test which would save landlords $30 when conducting a lead inspection. (See next story down) From the article: "Bob Cole, a member of the Toledo Lead Poisoning Prevention Coalition and managing attorney for Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, said the average cost of one dust-swipe test is $3.30. Inspectors would conduct about 10 tests per home. 'You’re talking about $30 to have tangible evidence that you either have a property that is lead safe, or you have a property that has lead dust,' Mr. Cole said."
The article also quotes educators who appeared at the news conference to describe how lead hazards affect children's educational attainment.
posted July 19, 2016Watching the sausage being made in Toledo
Another version of the Toledo Lead ordinance has been introduced in a effort to harmonize differences between the initial version by Toledo Lead Poisoning Coalition and an alternative supported by the real estate community. The Blade reports: "A third version of a proposed 'lead-safe' ordinance under consideration by Toledo City Council is now on the table, this one proposed by Councilman Larry Sykes, in hopes of bringing the measure to a vote at the next council meeting. The various proposals under review would require some older properties to be inspected and designated 'lead safe' before they could be rented out. Owners would have to treat identified lead hazards with interim controls — methods less invasive or costly than full abatement — which could include cleaning and painting to reduce the risk of lead poisoning for children living there. Up for debate is which properties should be included, the degree to which properties are inspected initially, and who could do inspections.
Kudos to the Toledo Blade for its detailed coverage of this important issue and to the legislators in Toledo City Council for taking the issue seriously. Most of all HUGS and KUDOs to the advocates who have worked tirelessly to change the strategy from following up on poisoned children to preventing poisoned children. posted July 21, 2016
Toledo real estate industry offers alternative lead ordinance
The Blade reports "Toledo City Councilman Rob Ludeman has offered his own version of a 'lead safe' rental property ordinance under consideration by city council, an effort he says will bring broader support in the real estate community. It’s an alternative to a proposal before council in which some older properties would be required to be inspected and deemed “lead safe” before they could be rented out. Owners would have to treat identified problems with interim controls — methods less invasive or costly than full abatement — which could include cleaning, painting, and covering exposed soil to reduce the risk of lead poisoning for children living there." The article quotes proponents of the original law as being skeptical of the "last minute" proposal. Advocates are planning a formal response on Monday.
Heated debate over lead in Toledo
The Blade reports on a City Council hearing on a proposed ordinance to require landlords to certify that their properties are Lead safe. From the article: "Debate over a controversial proposal to require some older Toledo rental properties to be certified 'lead-safe' erupted Monday when proponents clashed with landlords during a city council committee hearing. Proponents pleaded with councilmen to approve the measure, which they say is an affordable way to prevent lead poisoning in children. Property owners said the measure would be too restrictive, expensive, and force them to increase rents. Dominque Ottrix fought back tears as she told council her 7-year-old daughter was diagnosed with high levels of lead five years ago and still suffers from serious effects. The child is still 'on the waiting list' for neurological testing, Ms. Ottrix said."
"Lead safe" is a lesser standard than "lead free" and not as costly for landlords to achieve, while still protecting most children who live in or visit the rental property.
RHINO wonders what other business charges customers extra for a product that won't cause permanent harm to their children?