Landlord and Tenant Forums: By Landlords For Landlords

Excellent news for tenants living in unbearably hot conditions. Councillor Matlow and Councillor Parker are standing up for you.

Establishing Appropriate Room Temperatures for Tenants - by Councillor Josh Matlow, seconded by Councillor John Parker

* Notice of this Motion has been given.
* This Motion is subject to referral to the Licensing and Standards Committee. A two thirds vote is required to waive referral.

Recommendations

Councillor Josh Matlow, seconded by Councillor John Parker, recommends that:



1. City Council request the City Manager to:



a. study the effectiveness of amending Municipal Code Chapter 497, Heating, by setting an earlier date to which landlords may stop heating rental units; and



b. consult with landlords and tenants' organizations towards implementing a maximum allowable room temperature in rental housing units.

Summary

Toronto tenants have the right to a comfortable and healthy home. This motion seeks to amend the City's Municipal Code in order to better regulate room temperatures during the spring and summer months.



Municipal Code Chapter 497 requires that landlords turn on the heat in rental housing units from September 15th through to June 1st. This is to ensure that the room temperature be maintained to at least 21 degrees Celsius (70 degrees Fahrenheit). However, this enforcement by date rather than by temperature ensures that during hot days before June 1st, a tenant's unit may be not only uncomfortable but could present a public health issue to the elderly and/or tenants with certain medical conditions.



The month of May frequently sees warm weather in Toronto as 16 of the past 20 years have had days within that month over 28 degrees Celsius. Over the past 2 years there have been 5 days in May over 30 degrees Celsius.



This Motion seeks to change the Municipal Code to reflect the reality that before June 2nd, it may not be necessary to keep the heat on due to warm or hot spring temperatures. Further, it may be necessary to set an acceptable maximum temperature at which rooms can be heated.



(Submitted to City Council on July 11 and 12, 2012 as MM25.31)
Background Information
Member Motion MM25.31
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012 ... -48989.pdf)

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaI ... 12.MM25.31

I have central air in my rented house. For those rental buildings this will be very expensive. Hope they have the money (or decide to convert to condos).

This is all about heating and not cooling.Its about not having to heat the place when its hot outside but still the heating season.There is no mention of cooling.

I see a man with an agenda! The agenda is to attempt to diminish how Councillor Matlow and Parker protect tenants.

Look at it again. Put your reading glasses on and read slowly.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

1. City Council request the City Manager to:

a. study the effectiveness of amending Municipal Code Chapter 497, Heating, by setting an earlier date to which landlords may stop heating rental units; and

b. consult with landlords and tenants' organizations towards implementing a maximum allowable room temperature in rental housing units.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's continue if you don't mind.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, it may be necessary to set an acceptable maximum temperature at which rooms can be heated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The ball is now rolling to set up a maximum temperature for rental properties.

It will be a very good election issue as I'm sure tenants will enjoy having properly cooled homes.

Mr Fair, perhaps you should put on YOUR reading glasses, as this is a motion about allowing landlords to turn off the heat in May if the temperatures don't warrant having the furnace/boiler on. This has nothing to do with providing air conditioning, and you will never see a motion calling for air conditioning, ever. The government will air condition schools and retirement homes before they air condition your government subsidized apartment.
It also doesn't make any sense to enforce a maximum temperature for apartments where tenants pay for their own utilities. Are you saying the government should enforce upon poor tenants, who pay their utilities, that they MUST leave their air conditioning on all day long adding to their expenses each month? Not to mention the added cost of buying two to three airconditioners at $400 a piece.
I don't think so.

We don't have the hydro infrastructure to handle having an A/C in every home running 24/7 anyway. We'd brown-out the whole province.

Thanks for posting about a potential change in the laws which can save landlords money by being allowed to turn off the heating sooner in the year however. That's good for us

I use my Air conditioner very sparsely, even in this heat. My tenants threw air conditioners into their windows and expect me to pay the added electricity....I think not.

Go right ahead but a silly proposal by some lone word ward politician does not law maketh. Like your strange Canadian flag idea, this proposal shows a clear lack of appreciation for reality.

Keep in mind Mr. Fair unlike the defunct and pathetic FMTA forum freedom of expression, even when strange, is most welcome here..

It seems to me that this is in regards to condos where the law stated the condo (even if rented) could wait until june 1 to turn heat off/turn AC on. People living in condos with windows that don't open during hot days of May die in the heat. My sisters condo went up to 88 degrees and she had no air con. This motion just seems like an attempt to address this.

Ofcourse it will probably go no where anyhow.

Well it looks like it's going somewhere...the ether of further study:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article ... or-renters

I'm not against this proposal per se what I'm against is the idea that landlords will likely be expected to provide such a standard out of their own pockets. If this will ultimately benefit the lives of tenants shouldn't they foot some of the bill?

Also, the RTA already allows landlords and tenants to agree to terms that would allow air conditioners to be installed...oh that's right these provisions require tenants to by the actual costs of such a service...how foolish of me. Mr. Matlow thinks that tenants should be provide this service at no extra charge, that is why he brought forward this silly motion.

You know what really pisses me off though...the fact that Mr. Matlow likes to spout off about the need to "green" the city yet a provision such as this would be completely at odds with his policies on energy conservation as this would just result in greater energy consumption and exasperate the affects of global warming which has lead to increased heat in the Spring and Fall which this proposal is seeking to address.

Lastly, changes to the heating standards would do very little in large/older buildings as the systems in these buildings take some time to shut down and would likely not impact sudden spikes in temperature which happen in the Spring and Fall.

This is just a stupid proposal by a politicians who hasn't taken the time to consider the overall social/economic/environmental impacts of such a policy...it a proposal that is rooted simply in currying favour from tenants at the expense of landlords and the environment.

I have now stepped off my soap box...who's next?

I still don't perceive the motion as a call for airconditioners despite what the star spun it as. If you read the line:



The last line states "at which rooms can be heated". We're not "heating" the room in the summer, the sun is. This motion appears to have everything to do with forced heating, not the natural climate of the unit.

I doubt we will ever see a law mandating the air-conditioning of rental units. Why? Because TCHC is the single bigggest landlord in Ontario and that would require them to install air-conditioning which would cost $ both in equipment and operation.

not gonna happen.

In the Star Matlow said this could lead to mandatory air-conditioning for all rental buildings which would affect "some" landlords....as if a law only affects some and not others...what a fool.

Either way I emailed him and asked him 1) how will the TCHC pay for the infastructure and operating costs to air-condition 160,000 units? 2) who does he think will end up paying for the air-conditioning? 3) what about the environmental concerns?

lets see if I get a response.

Toronto city council: Proposal could mean mandatory air conditioning for renters
Published on Thursday July 12, 2012
Robyn Doolittle and Daniel Dale
Urban Affairs Reporters
36 Comments

• “No air conditioning” may be a thing of the past for Toronto renters, with a new proposal from Councillor Josh Matlow to re-evaluate “appropriate room temperatures” for tenants.

Council asked staff to look into two issues, one being the fact that landlords are currently required to keep heat in rental units on from Sept. 15 through June 1, regardless of outdoor temperatures. Matlow (Ward 22, St. Paul's) said the municipal code should be amended to allow “flexibility.”

Secondly, council asked that staff investigate whether a “maximum allowable room temperature” be written into the legislation. The councillor said it’s possible his motion might result in mandatory air conditioning and that might inconvenience some landlords, but “it’s not only worthwhile, I think it’s a basic expectation. It’s a quality of life issue and a basic health issue.”
------------------------

In the few years I've been reading here there have been many topics far ahead of the curve. Whether it was the alert on licensing in Waterloo, the HST not being included in the 2011 increase guideline, the annual increase guideline capped at 2.5%, the 1% 'guaranteed' for landlords being dropped, etc. Landlords should take this seriously.

silky28 wrote:

I doubt we will ever see a law mandating the air-conditioning of rental units. Why? Because TCHC is the single bigggest landlord in Ontario and that would require them to install air-conditioning which would cost $ both in equipment and operation.

not gonna happen.

-dont be so sure.

The TCHC is NOT held to the same standards as private landlords.

For isntance, the TCHC CAN use an income/rent ratio to determine affordable rent. The OHRC prohibits private landlords from using this common sense approach.

Also the TCHC can immediately evict a tenant who has lied on their application. Private landlords do not have this protection from bad tenants.

Just because private landlords may be forced to provide free air conditioning doesnt mean the TCHC will.

So what your saying is that the low income people who are the ones clamouring for this will never see air-conditioning in their social houses while the rest of the population gets air-conditioning but pays more than they should for it....lets face it, if it costs me an extra $500 per annum I'm raising rents $1000 per! after all, I gotta get my taste of this bonanza.