Hartford committee delays vote on relocation‑assistance ordinance amid staffing, hotel‑quality and enforcement questions

HARTFORD — The Housing & Human Services committee voted on Feb. 3 to postpone consideration of an amendment to Hartford’s relocation assistance ordinance so councilmembers and staff can refine enforcement language, staffing estimates and standards for temporary housing.

The ordinance's author, a councilmember, said the draft aims to codify the city's existing relocation practices, set benchmarks for tenant assistance and "put landlords on notice" about their obligations under the State Relocation Assistance Act (URAA). The councilmember said the proposal would clarify that the city pays relocation costs up front and seeks reimbursement from property owners, and would tie nonpayment to rental‑license renewal as an enforcement tool.

"Our practice has been three months in a hotel," the author said, but noted the draft proposed four months because the state's Supreme Court has found that period acceptable under the URAA; the author said members could amend that back to three months to avoid additional budgetary cost. He also proposed language requiring owners to secure buildings so displaced residents' belongings are protected and suggested the Hartford Police Department provide in‑person security "within available resources."

Council members pressed for more detail. One asked whether the ordinance would ensure return of security deposits for displaced tenants; the author said adding such language was feasible and could be enforced through the rental licensing statute. Another member raised concerns about the quality of hotels used for emergency housing and asked for objective criteria rather than subjective terms like "safe, clean and sanitary." HHS Director Jackson Shadid recommended measurable standards and noted that hoteling sometimes extends beyond Hartford, which can complicate inspections.

Legal questions also surfaced. An attendee with legal perspective reminded the committee that state law allows an affirmative defense when relocation is not caused by a code violation, and urged careful drafting so landlords who are not at fault are not unfairly penalized.

Motion and outcome: A councilmember moved to postpone agenda item 2.2 to the next month's committee meeting to allow further edits and staff reports; the motion carried after members voted in favor. The committee adjourned without acting on the ordinance.

Next steps: The ordinance's author and HHS staff will prepare revisions and a report that includes historical relocation counts, staffing estimates and proposed objective criteria for temporary housing to return to the committee at its next meeting.