News and notes from around town:

• As they would say in some circles, the price of poker just went up. That’s the take away message from Tuesday night’s decision by city commissioners to get tougher on landlords who allow too many people to live in their single-family rentals. If landlords want to play the game of trying to sneak more than three unrelated tenants into a single-family home, they’re going to have to make a much bigger bet. The new enforcement policy allows the city to revoke the license of a landlord who is caught with over occupancy two times in a 24-month period on the same piece of property. A revocation of the license, according to the director of the city’s planning department, likely would mean that property owner would be forever barred from leasing that particular piece of property. That’s a tall stack of chips.

There were several happy neighbors after city commissioners approved the policy Tuesday night. I think they felt the City Commission finally had taken a significant step toward enforcing the approximately decade-old law that says you can’t have more than three unrelated people living in a single-family home. It does seem significant, but I don’t think this new policy is going to make things as easy as neighbors hope. I asked several questions after Tuesday night’s meeting, and it became clearer that this issue is still going to be a real challenge for city officials to enforce.

Here’s the big thing I learned: The city has the legal ability to revoke a rental license only after a violation of one of several city codes has occurred. (In this case were talking about the occupancy provision in the development code.) Well, a city inspector can indeed find you in violation of the code, and thus your rental license is eligible to be revoked. But, with this being America and all, you are entitled to due process. You can appeal that decision to Municipal Court. A judge very well may find that you didn’t violate the code. (That’s been the problem all along. Proving four people live in a house is a difficult thing to do in court. Counting cars in a driveway is not evidence that stands up in court.) If that happens, as I understand it, the city’s ability to revoke your rental license has disappeared. Here’s the big question: Is the city really going to revoke a landlord’s license until that appeal process plays itself out. (Which likely will take six months or more.) The city’s planning director told me last night that the city will have to think that issue through a little bit. I think they’ll have to think it through quite a bit. If the city revokes a license, a landlord has to evict his tenants and lose his income on that property (perhaps even have to sell it), and then a court rules against the city, it seems like the city could be facing a facing a significant financial liability. That’s a pretty big bet for the city to make. Now, we’re playing poker.

• All this reminds me of something I’ve heard before about this issue: If the city really wants to get tough on problem landlords, it should have a policy to reach out to tenants. At the end of every school year, there are a lot of unhappy tenants moving out of apartments. (In the month of May the phrase “security deposit” creates more arguments in this town than even the phrase “credit card bill” creates in my house.) The city could create a campaign urging tenants who have evidence that they were living illegally in a single-family home to bring it forward at no risk to themselves. The city would get some takers. As we found out, there are tenants out there with quite a bit of evidence. The tenants in this article were willing to admit they were breaking the law. I think the city would find there are quite a few tenants who would be willing to do that in the right situation. Sure, there would be a lot of ax-grinding going on. But if the tenants have hard evidence, what does the city care about their motives? The FBI learned long ago that sometimes you have to work with bad guys to catch other bad guys.

• One last thing on rentals. (Hey, I sat through a long meeting Tuesday night. I’m going to make you suffer too.) Read this letter that the leaders of Lawrence’s Landmark National Bank wrote to city commissioners. They sound pretty concerned that there are a significant number of properties that could be impacted by increased enforcement of the long-standing code. (I think the no-more-than-three-unrelated provision has been around since 2000 or 2001.) From the letter:

“Should the commission seek to begin strict enforcement of non related occupancy guidelines, the ramifications to the value of many properties would be devastating to property valuation, and could trigger increased levels of foreclosures. Several investment properties are simply best suited as investment properties.”

It also urges commissioners to think hard about what strict enforcement of an existing law would do to investors. “It is fair to say that homeowners have much of their net worth tied up in their homes. On the same token, investors often have their net worth AND income tied directly to their investment in real estate. For this reason alone, your prudent research is necessary.”

All salient points, and I believe they all were brought up a decade ago when the ordinance creating the occupancy code was approved. It will be interesting to see if this new twist re-opens that whole debate.

• File this in the category of incomplete information. But I have seen building permit information that says Kansas City-based Title Boxing is coming to Lawrence. The boxing supplier is renovating space at Bob Billings Parkway and Wakarusa Drive. The business is going in the shopping center on the southeast corner of the intersection — taking space formerly occupied by Gragg’s Paint. I’m assuming the location will sell boxing equipment but also offer training. There are two Title Boxing types of business, but they’re both related. One is a store and one is a boxing club. From their Web site, it looks like the Title Boxing Clubs are expanding pretty rapidly right now. I’ll try to get in touch with the Title Boxing folks and report back. But it looks interesting. I think there already is a boxing center in North Lawrence, and several other MMA places throughout the city. Now West Lawrence gets in on the act. Maybe we ought to promote an event — West Lawrence vs. East Lawrence. In one corner, weighing in at 155 pounds with Birkenstocks … the Granola Gladiator. In the other corner weighing in at 155 pounds with a gold Rolex … the Humvee Haymaker. Ding, ding, ding.

• In that same shopping center at Bob Billings and Wakarusa, you’ll also see a new used clothing and children’s merchandise store. But look quick. The business is called Here We Grow Again, and it is unique because it is only open for a week. The new business plans to hold two sales a year in Lawrence — one in the fall/winter and another in the spring/summer. Area resident Nancy Inwood has been operating the business — which is a franchise — in Topeka for awhile, but decided to branch into Lawrence. The sale runs from Oct. 5 through Oct. 8. All the products — Inwood estimates she has about 13,000 items — are brought in by area folks who are selling on consignment. The seller keeps 70 percent of the sale price, while Inwood’s company keeps the remaining 30 percent for running the temporary store.