Latest news with #Fadness
Indianapolis Star
22-04-2025
- Business
- Indianapolis Star
Fishers council approves rental caps as legislature moves to override action
The Fishers City Council unanimously passed a first-of-its kind ordinance that restricts the number of homes that can be rented in subdivisions, in a move to stop institutional investors from purchasing houses at inflated prices and making them rentals. The 9-0 vote came after real estate interest groups made a last-minute push to nullify the ordinance in the Indiana General Assembly. Lawmakers attached to an unrelated bill a provision that would prohibit cities from limiting rentals. The surprise addition to House Bill 1389, which was discussed in a conference committee Monday morning, would need lawmakers from both chambers to sign off on it before a vote. At a packed Fishers City Hall meeting, residents were allotted 30 minutes to speak about the rental cap, with more than half saying they favored it but a sizable number clapping for those who opposed it. Those in support said they'd seen their subdivisions degraded by investors who paid high prices for lower valued homes, rented them, and neglected their maintenance, 'My job is to sell homes to people who want to buy them in desirable locations in the community,' said Fishers Realtor Jennifer Rice. 'All these rentals make neighborhoods undesirable. You have to be in the field to see this.' Opponents said the ordinance illegally limited what homeowners could do with their hard-earned property. 'It is not your right to say if I move next year…I can't rent my home,' said Marti Brown, a Sandstone neighborhood resident. 'It is baloney. It is un-American.' The administration of Mayor Scott Fadness and council worked one and a half years on the plan to address the local and national trend of outside investors gobbling up homes. Fadness said the rental cap would help keep lower-priced houses in the market because those are the ones most often targeted by Wall Street investors. That will give first-time buyers, who are typically younger with less wealth, a chance to own a home in Fishers and build equity. The ordinance would also establish a registry for landlords to make them more responsive to renters or city complaints. Opponents said Fadness and the council's work is outdated because the surge in institutional investors has subsided: the last one sold to an outside firm in Fishers was January of 2023. They also said it could severely limit the number of rentals available in county that already has an huge shortage and needs them for a growing number of lower-wage service workers. 'As we have shown, market conditions have changed and institutional investors have sold more homes over the last two years than they have purchased," said Chris Pryor, chief advocacy officer for the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors, at the meeting. 'This is a trend that is likely to continue.' MIBOR and the Indiana Association of Realtors opposed the rental caps while the One Zone Chamber of Commerce, covering Hamilton County, supported the ordinance and called it 'thoughtful and strategic approach to ensuring long-term neighborhood stability and housing market balance.' Fadness said the corporate buyers could be back in the future and called the measure forward looking. 'What it means for the long-term ability of young people is to build wealth,' he said at the meeting. 'We want a viable stock of housing for starter homes.' Most of the councilors, explaining their votes beforehand, said they have been swamped with calls from constituents in favor. Councilor Todd Zimmerman said the city was taking a bold stand in the face of monied outside interests. Other cities have addressed the problem in various ways but Fishers officials found none that have used rental caps. 'As a nation, if somebody doesn't take a stand who will?' Zimmerman asked.' At some point somebody has to take a stand when there is land being bought up by foreign and domestic entities who are taking way the livelihood and opportunity for people to build their wealth within their homes, within their families.' Fishers' 240 subdivisions have varying levels of rental rates, most lower than 10% but about 50 have rental rates much higher, some reaching 40%. But Vare said some of the city's numbers on high rental rates in misleading. For example, of the 17 Fishers neighborhoods exceeding 30% rentals, 11 are condo or townhome communities, including three that were recently built as for-sale units. While some homeowners associations set their own rental caps, others don't address it all and still others don't bother because covenant rules usually require unreachable voting majorities The ordinance has several exemptions for people who want to rent even though it would exceed neighborhood's cap, including having had the house on the market for at least six months. Other exemptions include: Job relocation Renting to family members or legal dependents Deployed military Selling the property will cause undue burden. The ordinance will take effect Jan. 1, 2026.
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Fishers' rental cap is another way to keep out people with low incomes
Fishers Mayor Scott Fadness in 2023 touted the $16 million Geist Waterfront Park as the city's last opportunity to create public access to Geist Reservoir, the man-made lake best known for luxury waterfront homes. In an odd way to promote public access, the city charged non-Fishers residents $50 to park their car there. Fadness claimed the parking fee was necessary to limit summer crowds, ensure safety and prioritize the limited parking for Fishers taxpayers. But this was not the truth. Attendance at the new park was a fraction of what the city estimated that first summer season. There was never a capacity issue in the parking lot. Clearly, the real purpose of the inflated parking fee was to discourage the people who can't afford it. Today, Fishers is trying to discourage the people who can't afford it from living in Fishers. Fadness is proposing a rental cap that would limit the number of rental properties in Fishers. This policy would be the first of its kind in the country. By limiting rental supply, this policy could inflate the cost of tenants' rent. Why would a growing Indiana suburb with a high demand for housing want to restrict rental supply? In an odd way to address a housing shortage, the rental restriction would apply to townhome and condo neighborhoods in addition to single-family homes. Why would a community lock a highly desired type of housing out of the most conducive neighborhoods? Fadness' rental cap proposal has been quietly presented to citizens as a benign 'rental registration program' – his solution to encourage homeownership, protect the character of residential neighborhoods, eliminate blight and address institutional investors who purchase single-family homes. But this is not the truth. Briggs: Fishers' attack on investor-owned homes will lock out families The last time a Fishers single-family home was purchased by an out-of-state institutional investor was over two years ago. Home ownership in Fishers is already 'exceptionally high' and exceeds national and state averages, according to the city's own housing study. Of course, exterior maintenance issues are not exclusive to rental homes. There are city code enforcement procedures and a fine system in place to ensure that all Fishers homes are maintained, owner-occupied and rentals alike. Fishers is branded as a 'smart, vibrant and entrepreneurial' community and is a desirable place to live. When I was a Fishers City Council member in 2023, I stated my opposition to the $50 parking fee. I said, "My strong concern is that it sends a message to people outside of Fishers that they are unwelcome here.' Today, I state the same opposition to a new proposed Fishers rental cap policy, which would have a much greater negative impact if approved. Fishers residents can choose to oppose this rental cap or not. They can attend the Monday council meeting and let the decision-makers hear their opinions. But they deserve to know the truth. Fishers is trying to discourage the people who can't afford it from living in Fishers. Jocelyn Vare is a renter and a Fishers resident for over 25 years. She is a former at-large member of the Fishers City Council and former member of the City of Fishers Housing Task Force. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Fadness' rental cap idea follows Geist Waterfront Park fees | Opinion
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Foes of Fishers' plan for rental caps in subdivisions gain allies ahead of vote. What to know
Fishers' first-of-its-kind proposal to curb large corporate investors from buying swaths of single-family homes and converting them to rentals is drawing local and national opposition as a vote on the measure looms. Some homeowners and renters in Fishers have been joined by real estate interests in pushing back against an ordinance that would limit the number of homes for rent in subdivisions to 10% and establish a rental registry for the homeowners. They contend the ordinance unduly reduces the number of rentals, restricts property owners' rights and could depress property values. 'The truth is, Fishers has a proven rental housing shortage and already has an extremely high level of homeownership,' said former City Councilor Jocelyn Vare, a Democratic critic who has organized meetings with residents. 'I don't know why the city would go down this path so brazenly.' The administration of Mayor Scott Fadness and Fishers City Council worked one and a half years on the plan to address the trend of outside investors gobbling up homes, often paying above market value in cash, and drastically changing the balance of renters to owner-occupied homes in some neighborhoods. Fadness said the rental cap would help keep lower-priced houses in the market because those are the ones most often targeted by Wall Street investors. That will give first-time buyers, who are typically younger with less wealth, a chance to own a home in Fishers and build equity. 'Our concern is you can no longer buy a home any longer in Hamilton County for under $450,000, $500,000, 'Fadness said. 'So if you want to attract the next generation or young people and they want to buy a starter home, they can't because investor bought so many to rent.' The ordinance would also prevent neighborhoods defined by cul-de-sacs from being dominated by rental units, which change their character for buyers who prefer neighbors who own their homes. 'I think people buy homes in single-family neighborhoods in a suburban environment with an expectation that that is the experience they are going to have, so I think there is component for sure,' Fadness said. But opponents said Fadness is overlooking one crucial and glaring point; the surge in institutional investors has subsided. In fact the last home purchased by one in Fishers was January of 2023, and the big firms are now selling the homes they bought. 'Market conditions have changed dramatically with interest rates' changing, said Chris Pryor, chief advocacy officer for the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors, which opposes the rental cap. 'So in many ways we think they are late to the game with this policy.' Vare said that's enough of reason to call the measure back for a fresh review of the caps, though she favors the rental registration. 'This was the whole rationale for this change in the first place and that isn't even valid anymore,' Vare said. Fadness acknowledged the investor buying spree has eased but that doesn't mean it couldn't come roaring back. 'If there was a hospitable market for it before I don't know why there couldn't be again,' Fadness said. 'And I think (if it does), this just ensures we will not get neighborhoods that are just saturated with rental products.' Fishers found that there are 2,522 single-family home rentals in the city, or 8% of all the single-family homes, with about 25% of those owned by institutional investors. A recent study found that corporate investors own more than 40,000 single-family rental homes in five Central Indiana counties. Pryor said there are more fundamental reasons for MIBOR's opposition to the rental cap: it intrudes on a homeowner's right to do what they please with their property. 'We think it violates core property ownership rights while it artificially interferes with the free market by limiting rentals and will have unintended consequences such as increased rental rates,' he said. 'We realtors have a long history of protecting property rights.' In addition, he said, 'it takes an option off the table for many people (single family rentals) at a time when purchasing a home is harder than ever.' Indiana Association of Realtors also oppose the rental caps while the One Zone Chamber of Commerce covering Hamilton County supports the ordinance and called it a ' thoughtful and strategic approach to ensuring long-term neighborhood stability and housing market balance,' in a recently published letter. Fishers' 240 subdivisions have varying levels of rental rates, most lower than 10%, but about 50 have rental rates much higher, some reaching 40%. Vare said some of the city's numbers are misleading. For example, of the 17 Fishers neighborhoods exceeding 30% rentals, 11 are condo or townhome communities, including three that were recently built as for-sale units. While some homeowners associations set their own rental caps, others don't address it all and still others don't bother because covenant rules usually require unreachable voting majorities. Foes of the caps are increasing pressure ahead of a possible vote by the City Council next Monday. Last week, two unsigned full-page ads appeared in the suburban Current newspapers urging action against the ordinance and text messages were sent to Fishers residents urging them to register their opposition. 'The Fishers City Council is looking to control who you can sell your home to,' the message read. 'Meaning you may be required to accept a LOWER offer on your home because of government overreach.' The texts, sent by the Hoosier Homeowners Alliance, a political organization with large financial contributions from the National Association of Realtors, prompted Fadness to issue a statement on the Fishers website. 'Yesterday, residents received intrusive and misleading messages from a national special interest group opposing our efforts to preserve the opportunity for families to own their homes and maintain our neighborhoods' vibrancy,' it read. 'I apologize for any confusion these messages caused, and in response, we have put together additional information that addresses the opposition's statements.' The ordinance has several exemptions to allow people to rent out their homes even when doing so would exceed neighborhood caps, including having had the house on the market for at least six months. Other exemptions include: Job relocation Renting to family members or legal dependents Deployed military Selling the property will cause undue burden. The City Council will discuss the ordinance at a meeting Monday night and public hearing and could vote on it afterward. The council could also delay the vote to another meeting. Call IndyStar reporter John Tuohy at 317-444-6418. Email at and follow on X/Twitter @john_tuohy. This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Foes of Fishers' rental caps in subdivisions gain allies ahead of vote
Indianapolis Star
21-04-2025
- Business
- Indianapolis Star
Foes of Fishers' plan for rental caps in subdivisions gain allies ahead of vote. What to know
Fishers' first-of-its-kind proposal to curb large corporate investors from buying swaths of single-family homes and converting them to rentals is drawing local and national opposition as a vote on the measure looms. Some homeowners and renters in Fishers have been joined by real estate interests in pushing back against an ordinance that would limit the number of homes for rent in subdivisions to 10% and establish a rental registry for the homeowners. They contend the ordinance unduly reduces the number of rentals, restricts property owners' rights and could depress property values. 'The truth is, Fishers has a proven rental housing shortage and already has an extremely high level of homeownership,' said former City Councilor Jocelyn Vare, a Democratic critic who has organized meetings with residents. 'I don't know why the city would go down this path so brazenly.' The administration of Mayor Scott Fadness and Fishers City Council worked one and a half years on the plan t o address the trend of outside investors gobbling up homes, often paying above market value in cash, and drastically changing the balance of renters to owner-occupied homes in some neighborhoods. Fadness said the rental cap would help keep lower-priced houses in the market because those are the ones most often targeted by Wall Street investors. That will give first-time buyers, who are typically younger with less wealth, a chance to own a home in Fishers and build equity. 'Our concern is you can no longer buy a home any longer in Hamilton County for under $450,000, $500,000, 'Fadness said. 'So if you want to attract the next generation or young people and they want to buy a starter home, they can't because investor bought so many to rent.' The ordinance would also prevent neighborhoods defined by cul-de-sacs from being dominated by rental units, which change their character for buyers who prefer neighbors who own their homes. 'I think people buy homes in single-family neighborhoods in a suburban environment with an expectation that that is the experience they are going to have, so I think there is component for sure,' Fadness said. But opponents said Fadness is overlooking one crucial and glaring point; the surge in institutional investors has subsided. In fact the last home purchased by one in Fishers was January of 2023, and the big firms are now selling the homes they bought. 'Market conditions have changed dramatically with interest rates' changing, said Chris Pryor, chief advocacy officer for the Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors, which opposes the rental cap. 'So in many ways we think they are late to the game with this policy.' Vare said that's enough of reason to call the measure back for a fresh review of the caps, though she favors the rental registration. 'This was the whole rationale for this change in the first place and that isn't even valid anymore,' Vare said. Fadness acknowledged the investor buying spree has eased but that doesn't mean it couldn't come roaring back. 'If there was a hospitable market for it before I don't know why there couldn't be again,' Fadness said. 'And I think (if it does), this just ensures we will not get neighborhoods that are just saturated with rental products.' How many rentals are in Fishers Fishers found that there are 2,522 single-family home rentals in the city, or 8% of all the single-family homes, with about 25% of those owned by institutional investors. A recent study found that corporate investors own more than 40,000 single-family rental homes in five Central Indiana counties. Pryor said there are more fundamental reasons for MIBOR's opposition to the rental cap: it intrudes on a homeowner's right to do what they please with their property. 'We think it violates core property ownership rights while it artificially interferes with the free market by limiting rentals and will have unintended consequences such as increased rental rates,' he said. 'We realtors have a long history of protecting property rights.' In addition, he said, 'it takes an option off the table for many people (single family rentals) at a time when purchasing a home is harder than ever.' Indiana Association of Realtors also oppose the rental caps while the One Zone Chamber of Commerce covering Hamilton County supports the ordinance and called it a ' thoughtful and strategic approach to ensuring long-term neighborhood stability and housing market balance,' in a recently published letter. Fishers' 240 subdivisions have varying levels of rental rates, most lower than 10%, but about 50 have rental rates much higher, some reaching 40%. Vare said some of the city's numbers are misleading. For example, of the 17 Fishers neighborhoods exceeding 30% rentals, 11 are condo or townhome communities, including three that were recently built as for-sale units. While some homeowners associations set their own rental caps, others don't address it all and still others don't bother because covenant rules usually require unreachable voting majorities. Ads and texting campaigns Foes of the caps are increasing pressure ahead of a possible vote by the City Council next Monday. Last week, two unsigned full-page ads appeared in the suburban Current newspapers urging action against the ordinance and text messages were sent to Fishers residents urging them to register their opposition. 'The Fishers City Council is looking to control who you can sell your home to,' the message read. 'Meaning you may be required to accept a LOWER offer on your home because of government overreach.' The texts, sent by the Hoosier Homeowners Alliance, a political organization with large financial contributions from the National Association of Realtors, prompted Fadness to issue a statement on the Fishers website. 'Yesterday, residents received intrusive and misleading messages from a national special interest group opposing our efforts to preserve the opportunity for families to own their homes and maintain our neighborhoods' vibrancy,' it read. 'I apologize for any confusion these messages caused, and in response, we have put together additional information that addresses the opposition's statements.' The ordinance has several exemptions to allow people to rent out their homes even when doing so would exceed neighborhood caps, including having had the house on the market for at least six months. Other exemptions include: Job relocation Renting to family members or legal dependents Deployed military Selling the property will cause undue burden. The City Council will discuss the ordinance at a meeting Monday night and public hearing and could vote on it afterward. The council could also delay the vote to another meeting.
Indianapolis Star
21-04-2025
- Business
- Indianapolis Star
Fishers' rental cap is another way to keep out people with low incomes
Home ownership in Fishers is already 'exceptionally high' and exceeds national and state averages. Jocelyn Vare | Opinion Contributor Fishers Mayor Scott Fadness in 2023 touted the $16 million Geist Waterfront Park as the city's last opportunity to create public access to Geist Reservoir, the man-made lake best known for luxury waterfront homes. In an odd way to promote public access, the city charged non-Fishers residents $50 to park their car there. Fadness claimed the parking fee was necessary to limit summer crowds, ensure safety and prioritize the limited parking for Fishers taxpayers. But this was not the truth. Attendance at the new park was a fraction of what the city estimated that first summer season. There was never a capacity issue in the parking lot. Clearly, the real purpose of the inflated parking fee was to discourage the people who can't afford it. Today, Fishers is trying to discourage the people who can't afford it from living in Fishers. Fadness is proposing a rental cap that would limit the number of rental properties in Fishers. This policy would be the first of its kind in the country. By limiting rental supply, this policy could inflate the cost of tenants' rent. Why would a growing Indiana suburb with a high demand for housing want to restrict rental supply? In an odd way to address a housing shortage, the rental restriction would apply to townhome and condo neighborhoods in addition to single-family homes. Why would a community lock a highly desired type of housing out of the most conducive neighborhoods? Fadness' rental cap proposal has been quietly presented to citizens as a benign 'rental registration program' – his solution to encourage homeownership, protect the character of residential neighborhoods, eliminate blight and address institutional investors who purchase single-family homes. But this is not the truth. The last time a Fishers single-family home was purchased by an out-of-state institutional investor was over two years ago. Home ownership in Fishers is already 'exceptionally high' and exceeds national and state averages, according to the city's own housing study. Of course, exterior maintenance issues are not exclusive to rental homes. There are city code enforcement procedures and a fine system in place to ensure that all Fishers homes are maintained, owner-occupied and rentals alike. Fishers is branded as a 'smart, vibrant and entrepreneurial' community and is a desirable place to live. When I was a Fishers City Council member in 2023, I stated my opposition to the $50 parking fee. I said, "My strong concern is that it sends a message to people outside of Fishers that they are unwelcome here.' Today, I state the same opposition to a new proposed Fishers rental cap policy, which would have a much greater negative impact if approved. Fishers residents can choose to oppose this rental cap or not. They can attend the Monday council meeting and let the decision-makers hear their opinions. But they deserve to know the truth. Fishers is trying to discourage the people who can't afford it from living in Fishers.
