The electronic keying is probably annoying but it's got to be an order of magnitude better than having master keys and locks.

At least when it's electronic it's logged and auditable somewhere. The amount of bad outcomes from keys floating around out there is absurd.

> third party apps with account/phone/video+photos requirement to access package room

And despite that, packages will still be stolen regularly.

I mean obviously fees should either be included in the original price, or there should be a reason it might apply in some cases but not others. But I can also see someone just wanting to break out the costs as separate line items to highlight where their costs come from. (Here's what I pay for the property taxes, here's what I pay for the included utilities, here's what I pay for these maintenance services, so tada, there's your rent.)

But again, if the advertised price must be the total price, it doesn't matter if there's a mailbox access fee or not. It's no different than if they eliminate the fee but raise the price the same amount. Make the advertised price be the highest price, and say "hey, you can advertise discounts off of that".

Nobody's going to advertise you can save $5 a month by eliminating your mailbox.

A similar effect, would be no longer advertising a plan's price if you enable paperless billing and autopay. You'd have to advertise the price without, and then can offer discounts for those things.

Or movie ticket prices being required to be listed with the convenience fee included, and if a theater wants, it can advertise a discount for buying a ticket some other way. More than likely that would just kill convenience fees.

Small landlords also rent out basement suites and carriage homes on their own property, no? Those may very well sit empty if the return isn’t worth the risk.

Editing to just add: I absolutely support transparent pricing for rental properties.

They don't own the buildings, but it's frequently part of a condo association and they own a unit or two.

And market-rate rental complexes replace condos. I can see legitimate reasons for subsidized rental complexes, and there is always some need for market-rate units, but I don't see any justification for dedicated market-rate complexes. People who can afford paying the market rate should be able to buy if they stay in the area long enough, but American cities have a shortage of smaller units you can buy. For some reason, maybe due to regulatory and market failures, developers prefer rental complexes over condos.

Mine did, in North Hollywood, owned a 2 story building, I think 8 units with varying floor plans. Does that qualify as an apartment building? He did all the work himself unless it was something like HVAC or required permitting. He was an IT dude who got laid off by Century Link and diversified. Didn't seem to enjoy the maintenance part though, but was perfectly capable.

> lowering availability for buyers

This makes an unsubstantiated assumption that everyone would rather buy and can afford to, ignoring that people have reasons to rent.

You are incorrect about this law being "simple". For a start it requires three years of mandatory recordkeeping with an automatic presumption of violation for inadequate records. Forget to save a copy of that ad you ran on Facebook three years ago for your rental? Tough luck, you owe the tenant $4000 plus their attorney fees.

The city also added a private right of action so this law will be weaponized by attorneys with a profit motive, the same way the ADA has been.

Seattle is free to pass whatever laws they wish but they can't do so and then complain about a lack of homes for rent in the city. This hits families who want to rent a home much harder than single people or couples who tend to rent apartments.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/where-seattle...

Solution: you may put it on the receipt, but the price you advertise must be final all-in. Gas stations manage it just fine. Advertised price is what you pay, but receipt shows the taxes

How would you like it if you rented a VM from AWS, and in the bill they added fees for employee health insurance, social security and medicare? That's a cost of compliance too!

You can’t ban business from passing on their costs to their customers.

Australia just tried this by banning businesses from charging a card use surcharge.

You really reckon business aren’t going to then just wrap the cost of card service / merchant fees in to every product, thereby hurting those who pay with cash?

Hint: that’s exactly what businesses are doing. I know because I asked them.

Maybe stop voting for politicians who believe they can tax and regulate an economy to growth and productivity.