Every year in mid-August University of Wisconsin students pack up their clothes and couches, scrub the stove and the bathroom sink, and brave whatever weather they might be unlucky enough to face on “homeless night” before unloading their lives in a new apartment at noon on Aug. 15. Any excitement they may have for their new digs is often overshadowed by the stress of moving and the three-week period of anxiously waiting to see just how much their landlords gutted from their security deposits. It has happened to me: Spending the last few summer days at my apartment making sure there was not a spot or dent that could be deducted for. Planning back-to-school grocery shopping with the expectation of a full month’s rent coming my way. Opening up an envelope from my landlord to find an itemized list of ridiculous cleaning charges and other inconsistencies. Getting ripped off and feeling like there was nothing I could do about it. Fortunately for me, my story ended differently than most security deposit tragedies. My roommates and I demanded a face-to-face meeting with a representative from our former property management company and went armed with a list of grievances to counter their itemized tally of deductions. After diplomatically defending our meticulous cleaning, with only our word as proof, the man behind the desk effortlessly granted a full refund — as if these unfair charges happen all the time and a few hundred dollars here and there was nothing to sweat over. Landlord-tenant conflicts rarely end this way, though, and most students have neither the time nor the funds to fight an uphill battle against large property owners with years of experience in handling — or mishandling — student lease provisions. To be sure, unhappy tenants have limited options when it comes to arguing for more of their money back. Contacting my landlord worked out in my case, but from three years worth of anecdotal evidence from disgruntled friends, I know this is the exception rather than the rule. Small claims court is the alternative, where fees are likely to outweigh anything the unhappy renter stands to gain. To help solve this perennial problem, Alderman Eli Judge, District 8, has introduced what he calls a new “tool” for both tenants and landlords caught up in security deposit debacles. The photo ordinance would require landlords to “obtain, maintain, and provide or make available, upon request, photographic evidence of damage, waste or neglect being charged against a tenant’s security deposit.” On its face, this provision seems especially beneficial for previously disenfranchised student tenants and, although to a lesser extent, landlords facing illegitimate grievances from unhappy renters by introducing a greater degree of accountability to the security deposit return process. Issues of feasibility aside — some of the major property management companies in Madison already have similar policies, proving that picture taking can be done in the turnover process — the question of efficacy is up for debate. When the issue at hand is a charge for cleaning a bathtub, photo evidence is not likely to automatically solve the problem. Who, in that case, is to say how much the tub cleanup was worth? If the landlord and tenant can’t decide, a problem not unlike what happens every September, it’s up to the small claims court — a place students are reluctant to turn to, with or without photographic evidence in their favor. It would be naive to claim that mandatory photo evidence would eliminate the need for intervention from outside agencies in all cases. When a tenant points to a photo and assigns a two-hour cleaning cost and his landlord maintains it was worth four, the photo does not solve the problem. Despite its limitations, though, the photo ordinance has the potential to be just what Mr. Judge touts it as: a tool. Dissatisfied tenants will still butt heads with landlords and issues will still need arbitration from outside parties, but this provision would undoubtedly help streamline the process. If photographic evidence doesn’t help at the landlord-tenant level, it could surely help a small claims court in its decision. Whether or not the ordinance passes, the idea behind it is something students would be wise to take note of. Snapping pictures upon moving into a new apartment and again on the way out would take only minutes and could provide a valuable tool should security deposit complaints arise. With thousands of students leaving Madison every year and just as many coming in, lessons learned by graduating student renters are constantly lost to the newest generation of tenants. Mr. Judge’s photo ordinance could help alleviate some of the landlord-tenant problems. Students looking out for themselves could do the same. Kate Maternowski ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in English.