Legislative Update – Week 5

What we need from you

What this bill does

• (a) Government assistance payments paid to a landlord under the housing choice
• voucher program administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
• Development are not part of a tenant’s income for the purposes of this chapter [i.e. for Fair Housing]
• (b) A landlord’s refusal to participate in the housing choice voucher program does not
• constitute a discriminatory housing practice under this chapter.

In other words currently Section 8 is a protected class and refusing to work with Section 8 could get a landlord a $10,000 fine. This bill will allow landlords to opt out and not be liable for discrimination.
What the bill does not do

• Housing Authorities and advocates say this bill will hurt affordable housing and low income tenants. We believe that is not true. Section 8, like Medicare, was designed as an optional government program. Doctors can opt out of Medicare if they don’t want to deal with the restrictions or bureaucracy of the program, and landlords should be able to opt out of Section 8. 41 states allow landlords to opt out of Section 8 and the program works just fine there. Texas and Indiana passed similar bills last year to what is proposed in Utah, and nothing bad happened to low income tenants. This is an issue of business freedom.

• There are 11,000 section 8 vouchers in Utah, out of almost 300,000 rental units. That’s only 4%. Housing authorities Section 8 tenants, Property Managers, Landlords and attorneys testified last week at a hearing that if this bill passed only about 10-20% of landlords would actually stop taking Section 8 vouchers. But even if 50% of the 300,000 rental units became unavailable to Section 8 participants, there would still be almost 15 times as many units available as are needed. In addition, there are almost 20,000 government subsidized affordable housing units under various programs that would love to take section 8 tenants – and that’s even before the private market.

Here are links to more info on the bill:

Explanation of Landlord’s concerns
Answers to questions from the Housing Authorities
Letter outlining what we are asking for

What we need from you

Go to this website http://le.utah.gov/GIS/findDistrict.jsp to find your State Senator (just put in your street address and Zip Code, i.e. “448 East Winchester 84107”). Make sure to only find your Senator (the House hasn’t taken up the matter yet). Then using the contact info it pulls up, send a short email with the subject line: “Constituent who supports SB 175” that says something, in your own words, like:

Dear Senator,

I am a constituent and voter in your district who is in the rental housing business

• I support and ask you to vote in favor of SB 175 Fair Housing Option Amendments
• When mandatory section 8 was passed in 1989 the government guaranteed the condition of the rental after the tenant moved – something they no longer do
• We love low income tenants and this bill is not focused on them, it is focused on the government bureaucracies that run the section 8 program
• Unfortunately, because landlords have to accept section 8, many housing authorities who administer the program treat landlords poorly and don’t follow their own policies
• This bill would restore market forces to housing authorities, who would have to treat landlords better or lose them as customers
• 41 other states have this same law and two states last year, Texas and Indiana, passed similar laws and the section 8 program actually works better in states where there is choice
• Thanks for your support.
• Feel free to share any bad experiences you have had with housing authorities or money you have lost by being forced to take Section 8 (PLEASE don’t bash the tenants. We are only focusing on how the Program itself and the Housing Authorities have caused problems).

Copy us on your email so we can track how many are being sent paul@uaahq.org

This week one of our major bills went through committee on a 9-1 vote and is headed to the House floor!

HB 196, Unlawful Detainer Revisions, Sponsored by Keith Grover (R), Provo

This bill deals with squatters and changes the definition of something called peaceful possession. In our eviction (unlawful detainer) statute, we must go through a notice and lawsuit process to remove someone we created a tenancy relationship, because we gave them rights of possession. However, there are cases when someone simply breaks in or moves in to one of our rentals without permission or any rights to be there. In those cases, we don’t have to do an eviction, we can simply treat them as trespassers.

The bill’s sponsor is a landlord himself and has dealt personally with cases when people move in without permission. Sometimes, when police are called they are good and escort the trespasser out, other times they tell landlords to “do an eviction”. The problem with that is not only does it take time and cost money, but in some cases it hurts the previous tenant.

Up to now, if you had a tenant who moved out, but they had acquaintances who took advantage of them and then moved in, you would have to do an eviction of the previous tenant, and get a judgement on their record when they were being taken advantage of by someone. This law will clarify that if someone moves into your rental without your permission and you don’t know who they are that you can treat them like a trespasser. It’s good for tenants, landlords, and the courts because it will reduce the number of evictions being done.