A proposed ordinance mandating the registration and inspection of all residential rental properties in Oxford Village is officially off the table – for now.

Last week, council voted 4-1 to remove the issue from further consideration at this point.

This is the second time since 2013 that council has discussed a rental ordinance, then dropped the issue. Both times it was met with significant opposition from local property owners and landlords.

Some council members felt it was simply too heavy a load to place on the shoulders of the already-overburdened village staff.

“I’m totally for this and I think it’s something that Oxford needs,” said village President Sue Bossardet, but “I can’t see us taking on this gigantic thing right now.”

She noted that at the Oct. 11 meeting, it was pointed out by audience members the village doesn’t issue permits in a timely manner and is only open four days a week due to budget cuts.

“It struck a chord with me, especially the thing about the permits, which I know we have a problem with,” Bossardet said.

Until the village gets either “more help” or staff that’s “able to keep up (with) this workload,” Bossardet said, “I’m not in favor of (the rental ordinance) anymore.”

Councilman Erik Dolan was of the same mind.

“Unfortunately, I do not feel that this organization is properly prepared to handle the (additional responsibility) that this will put in our laps,” he said.

Dolan pointed out the village’s code enforcement officer, Dan Durham, recently resigned and a replacement is now being sought. The code enforcement officer would have been tasked with conducting the initial inspections under the proposed ordinance.

Dolan also doesn’t believe the village has the ability to “accurately monitor” rental properties due to the “transient nature” of their occupants.

“I think there’s going to be constant turnover,” he said.

Councilwoman Maureen Helmuth, who voted against dropping the issue, suggested the village start out small and at least get all of the rental units registered.

“There’s no cost for the registration,” she said. “I think we can get everyone registered.”

Doing this would allow public safety personnel to know where rental units are located, how many there are and if any people with special needs are living in them, according to Helmuth.

Once registration is complete, she said council can revisit the inspection component.

Despite her support for having such an ordinance, Helmuth noted she had issues with some of the items on the proposed inspection checklist.

“I thought they were going overboard,” she said.

Bossardet said she agreed with Helmuth and thought her fellow council member made some valid points, but the fact remains “we just do not have the staff to undertake this.”

Bossardet also doesn’t believe the owners of “private homes” where portions, such as basements, have been converted into rental units “are going to be forthcoming” when it comes to registering.

Helmuth suggested council members personally take on some of the workload.

“I think if council’s going to continue to cut staff, we need to step up to the plate and help out in the office,” she said. “And this is something council could easily do.”

“We are a policy-making board, not employees,” Bossardet responded.

“That doesn’t mean we can’t volunteer our time and step up to the plate and help out,” Helmuth said.