When did the Constitution become optional for NC cities?

The Fayetteville city council recently turned down a request from the city manager to establish a rental housing registration program. According to The Fayetteville Observer, council members liked the program but disliked the fees that landlords would be charged.

On the surface, the programs seem innocuous. Owners of rental housing register with the city so that if there is a problem with the apartments, the police or other city officials can quickly contact the owners. A small fee to pay for the paperwork seems reasonable.

That feature, however, is not why cities across the state are establishing these programs. The Fayetteville proposal was modeled after the Raleigh program. Charlotte recently considered one amid much controversy.

It seems that city managers, city council members, police and even the landlord associations charged with representing landlords need a refresher on the Constitution. The not-so-hidden agenda behind these programs is to force landlords to do police work without compensation. In other words if the police cannot catch drug dealers, prostitutes, etc., and the courts refuse to hold convicted criminals accountable, the cities will use these programs to force landlords to be police, judge, and jury.

Here is how rental registration programs work in the Orwellian world of local government. After landlords register and pay the fee, they are responsible for the behavior of their tenants. If they suspect their tenants are engaging in illegal behavior — selling drugs, prostitution, etc. — the landlords must evict them. If they don’t, then the landlords, not the tenants, face penalties. In Charlotte, the proposal included a provision that if the landlord did not act, the city could revoke the registration. Since it would be illegal to rent apartments without being registered, it would effectively put the landlord out of business.

The trigger for many of these programs is the number of "disorder activities" within a certain time period. Often this number varies based on the number of apartments in the complex. The Charlotte proposal defines disorder activities as "reported violent crimes, reported property crimes, and certain types of disorder-related, person-initiated requests for police service."

The Constitution guarantees that those accused of a crime are innocent until proven guilty and have the right to a jury trial. These programs effectively abolish both of those constitutional provisions. Landlords must evict tenants based on "reported" crimes, not actual convictions. Landlords must evict tenants even if accused tenants are found innocent. Landlords must evict tenants if the residents make too many totally unfounded "person-initiated requests for police service."

In order to protect themselves, landlords must snoop around and try to determine if illegal activity it going on inside tenants’ apartments. There is no need for probable cause; they must take action based on suspicion or rumors. Tenants are not innocent until proven guilty; they can be evicted based on little or no evidence. Landlords who don’t act face the wrath of city officials enforcing the ordinance. Landlords who act without justification face court suits brought by tenants who have been unjustly evicted.

Ironically, these programs come after years of "tenants’ rights" groups pressuring city governments to pass tenants’ rights ordinances that prevent landlords from interfering with the privacy of tenants. Now the cities are forcing landlords to investigate the personal lives of tenants, make decisions on suspected illegal behavior, and then to evict those whom they, not the courts, deem criminal.

When did the Constitution become optional for cities?