From: Gregory Dagge
To: Meredith Matthews; Stacy Atkins-Salazar; Alex Stillman; Kimberley White; Sarah Schaefer; Tabatha Miller; David Loya; Rhea Varley; Merritt Perry; Engineering Dept; Emily Sinkhorn; Jennifer Dart; Delo Freitas Subject: a. Introduce Ordinance No. 1592, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Arcata Amending Chapter 5 (Residential Rental Inspection Program of Title VIII (Building Regulations) of the Arcata Municipal Code Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2026 9:50:22 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Re: Ordinance No. 1592 – Amendments to Chapter 5, Residential Rental Inspection Program (Title VIII, Building Regulations)
Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members and City Leadership, I am writing regarding the proposed introduction of Ordinance No. 1592, which would amend Chapter 5 of Title VIII of the Arcata Municipal Code governing the Residential Rental Inspection Program (RRIP). After reviewing the program’s performance and the proposed amendments, I urge the Council to reconsider whether this program continues to serve any meaningful public purpose in its current form.
The RRIP was originally justified as a mechanism to improve oversight of health, safety, and welfare conditions in rental housing. However, the program has not delivered on that promise.
The overwhelming majority of inspections have resulted in no violations, demonstrating that most small‑unit landlords are already maintaining safe and compliant housing without the need for additional regulatory intervention.
At the same time, the program fails to address the areas where genuine problems do exist:
Large apartment complexes and short‑term rental operations are not meaningfully included, despite representing a substantial portion of Arcata’s rental market and posing equal—if not greater—potential for health and safety violations.
Illegal dwelling units and unpermitted construction remain entirely outside the program’s scope, even though these are precisely the situations most likely to create unsafe living conditions, neighborhood compatibility issues, and lost revenue to the City through avoided permitting and taxation.
Fee collection is inconsistent and inequitable, with small‑unit landlords bearing the cost of a program that does not apply to larger, higher‑impact rental operations.
If the city is unwilling to require inspections or collect fees from large apartment owners —and if the majority of small‑unit owners continue to pass inspections without issue— then the fundamental question becomes unavoidable: Why maintain this program at all?
A regulatory program that does not target the highest‑risk properties, does not address illegal units, does not generate meaningful compliance improvements, and does not equitably collect fees is not a program that advances public health, safety, or welfare. It is simply a bureaucratic layer that consumes staff time while producing negligible benefit.
As you consider Ordinance No. 1592, I urge the Council to confront the core issue rather than make incremental adjustments. Either the RRIP must be redesigned to actually address the problems it was created to solve—including illegal units, unpermitted construction, and large‑scale rental operations—or it should be discontinued entirely.
Arcata deserves regulatory programs that are effective, equitable, and aligned with real community needs. The RRIP, as currently structured and as proposed for amendment, does not meet that standard.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your continued service to our community.
Respectfully, Gregory Daggett