HONESDALE, PA — In October 2025, the Honesdale Borough Council amended its rental regulations to require all rental units be inspected every other year. That requirement came under fire at a Monday, October 26, 2026 meeting of the borough council. 

The landlords who spoke at last month's meeting pushed back against the ordinance, calling it an unnecessary and intrusive expense. "It's not for public safety, at least not for the entire public here and all the residents of the borough," said William H. Buselli Jr. 

Borough council also heard from a resident who emphasized the real concerns about safety tenants may have, and the difficulty a tenant may have in getting safety concerns addressed. 

"Maybe renters are scared; maybe they are in a bind… I think safety [matters] over paying additional fees to have a building just checked, fixed if needed," she said. 

From the landlords

The legislation requires landlords to schedule an inspection for their properties at the time of the renewal of the then-current registration license, and follow-up inspections every other year thereafter. Rental inspections and code enforcement are currently handled for Honesdale Borough by Northeast Inspection Consultants, a third-party firm hired at the June meeting of the council. 

The landlords who spoke at the meeting had a couple of common concerns. 

They questioned why the inspection requirement covered only landlords with tenants; if it truly aimed to ensure public safety, would it not be aimed at all property owners within the borough, they asked?

They questioned the expense and the inconvenience of the policy. The cost of the inspections would need to be passed on to their tenants, they said—and, they added, the true cost would be higher than the $140 fee every other year. 

Blair Bueslli said he would probably need to charge his tenants double or triple that amount, "because of, for lack of a better term, the circus that it is when we have to spend time on the phone meeting an inspector, explaining to them how a GFCI receptacle works, how the entire kitchen is protected by the GCFI, one circuit is protected by one outlet."

"We're spending three, four, six hours a year per unit to go through and explain and fight and battle why they can't just pass the rental units that we do keep up on," he said. 

Landlords questioned the legality of the regulation. Was it constitutional, they asked, to ensure that every rental property in Honesdale got inspected, with no distinction between properties with active safety concerns and those without?

They speculated, as well, about the borough's motives in putting in the regulations. Their apartments were safe, they assured the borough; they took care of their properties. Inspecting those properties wouldn't be for the cause of public safety; there had to be some other reason for it, such as to clean up something else or raise funds. 

"It's definitely not a safety thing," said Blair Buselli. "We don't buy that; we know that's not the case."

From a tenant's perspective

The tenant who spoke at the meeting did have concerns about public safety. [She asked not to be named, for fear of retaliation.]

She had paid the borough $150 out-of-pocket for an inspection of her apartment, she said. That inspection found issues that needed to be fixed; a year later, they hadn't been. 

"It's not safe; it is not a safe apartment," she said. "I don't speak up on it because I'm afraid of being evicted."

From the borough

Speaking as the chair of the borough council's zoning subcommittee, borough councilor James Hamill defended the borough's policy while acknowledging the landlord's feedback. 

Without a regular inspection period, apartments could go decades without anyone going in to see if they were being maintained properly, said Hamill. "There were realizations that, if you don't do that, then you run the risk of having something that could affect the health and welfare and safety of the individuals who are renting."

At the same time, he said, this was the first time the policy was getting this much public feedback, and that was feedback the zoning committee would take into consideration. 

"I can tell you right now, this policy has been arrived at well before now, under different make-ups of the zoning committee and public safety and all, and it was vetted," he said. "But I can certainly understand where there are more than just you who want to determine whether or not there's fairness or legitimacy to that type of requirement."