HomeMy WebLinkAbout36. 13-283MAY 28, 2013 13 -283 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED 6 -0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: CITY OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED AB 183 & SB 179 RELATING
TO CHANGES TO STATE RENTAL HOUSING LAWS
INITIATED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER CUMMINGS
WHEREAS, policy decisions should be made by representative bodies closest to
the needs and interests of the people; and
WHEREAS, 2013 Assembly Bill 183 (Senate Bill 179) would preempt in part a
number of City ordinances regarding landlord /tenant rights, including but not limited to,
the minimum housing code, nuisance ordinance and fair housing ordinance as that
relates in part to prohibiting the City from requesting information from a landlord or
contacting landlords in the event of issues concerning code violations; and
WHEREAS, landlord /tenant laws affect more than just the contract between two
individuals; landlord /tenant laws affect the character of the City and help control the
appropriate use of public resources; and
WHEREAS, in a City such as Oshkosh where there is a high percentage of rental
units, the need for the City to be able to legislate in this area is especially important.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Oshkosh that the City of Oshkosh affirms its municipal right to enact local ordinances
that serve to promote public health, well being and quality of life within its jurisdiction
and opposes AB 183 and SB 179 and urges the State Legislature not to adopt this bill.
I.
rr-P-
OfHKOfH
ON THE WATER
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services
DATE: May 23, 2013
RE: Opposition to AB 183 and SB 179 making statewide changes to tenant
landlord law.
BACKGROUND
Assembly Bill 183 and its companion bill in the Senate, SB 179, are proposed legislation
making various changes to landlord/tenant laws in Wisconsin by abrogating and/or pre-
empting municipalities from enacting such laws as determined by their own local
situations. The bill was developed in cooperation with the Wisconsin Realtors
Association and is currently being fast tracked through the legislature in an attempt to
bring the legislation to a vote as quickly as possible. The bill is currently being opposed
by the City's of Madison and Milwaukee, Dane County, Legal Action of Wisconsin,
United Council of UW Students and others. The City of Madison passed a resolution
opposing AB 183 on 518113 with Milwaukee passing a similar resolution at committee
level.
ANALYSIS
As the bill is moving through the legislature with such speed it is unclear exactly all the
impacts of the 50 plus changes to landlord tenant law will ultimately have but at a
minimum it represents an erosion of local control of landlord/tenant matters and
potentially undermines our efforts to improve neighborhoods.
I have attached an analysis by the Tenant Resource Center identifying some of the
impacts of the bill. One of the more troubling changes is Item 3 that doesn't require
landlords to disclose uncorrected building code violations they have knowledge of at the
time a tenant enters in a rental agreement unless they have actually been officially cited
by the building inspector. This is troubling to us in that there are over 13,000 rental
units in the community and no proactive rental inspection program and with the age of
many of these rental units, and the lack of understanding of tenant rights by many in the
community, there is a concern that this provision will work directly against the interests
of the tenants in having a safe rental environment. I have also attached a press
release from the Tenant Resource Center discussion AB 183.
From a local standpoint, the bill specifically prohibits a municipality from requiring a
landlord to provide certain information to a tenant or require the landlord to provide
certain information to the municipality unless that information is required by federal or
state law or is required of all residential real property owners, which may circumvent or
pre -empt efforts the city may want to undertake to work with the landlord /tenant
community to improve the housing stock and is especially concerning given the high
percentage of rental units in the community_
The proposed legislation appears to much favor the landlord community at the expense
of the tenant community and local regulation of such matters. Any approach to dealing
with these types of issues is better understood by those in the local community where
legislation can be drafted to suit local needs and as such any preemption of local
authority in these matters should be opposed.
FISCAL IMPACT
Undetermined.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation to oppose AB 183 and SIB 179.
Approved,
City Manager
STATEWIDE TENANT /LANDLORD LAW CHANGES
AB183
The proposed bill is available i i its entirety here:
http : / /w « com /cospoiiso i afts /li-bl93l . p(If
1. New rights of landlord to leavevehicles towed on private property ffis. Stats. 349.13) — Landlords can
tow a tenant's vehicle (or their guest's vehicle) at the tenant's expense as long as one of the following apply:
The property- was posted with signs stating that miatithnorized vehicles would be towed, or in the absence of dish
posting if the vehicle has been issued a citation or there is a prepossession judgment. The citation can be issued
by anyone. If the tenant doesn't pay within 30 days or make arrangements, the vehicle will be considered
abandoned. The department of transportation will determine what fees will be reasonable. The oivner call get
personal property out of the vehicle clueing regular business hours.
2.New ri of landlord to dispose of property left behind, including property left behind in an eviction
(Wis. Stets. 799.45(2) & (3) and Wis. Stets. 704.07(55)) — Unless there's adifferent agreement in writing, if
tenant is evicted the landlord may notify the sheriff that they - isli to oversee the removal and disposal of ally
property left behind. The landlord, not the sheriff, will now determine if the property is trade. This option sloes
not require the landlord to move and store the property or notify the tenant. Additionally, in the absence of a
written agreement to the contrary, the landlord will now be able to notify the tenant at any tirire during the lease
that they mill not remove or store property left behind, including property left behind at the normal end of a
lease, instead of having to tell tine tenant what they plan to do at the tune they sign the lease.
3. Landlord does not have to disclose uncorrected building code violations they have actual knowledge of
at the time a tenant enters a renUl agreement unless those violations were cited ffis. Stets.
704.07(2)(bm) and ATCP 134.04) — Even if the landlord has actual knowledge of the - iolations, they are not
required to disclose this to the tenant tulless a biulding itipector htas officially cited them.
4. Tenant to pay for bed buglcockroachlants and other pest infestations by default ffis. Stats. 70=1.07(2)
& (3) — In multi -unit buildings, it is often hard to fi gtue out where the pests cantle from, and thus who should be
responsible for the cost of the repair. This cost is determined by the landlord and "presumed reasonable unless
proved otherwise by the tenant." Now, if a tenant fails to assist ill the treatment or the landlord trunks the tenant
brought in the pests, the tenant will, by default, have to pay for the treatment or fix it themselves.
5. Check -in sheets (Wis. Stets. 704.08) — Lancllords no longer have to fill in the check -in sheets with an
itemized description of the rental property. Landlords must only give tenants a check -in sheet to fill in, and the
tenant orllr has 7 clay; to complete it and tuna it ill.
6. Maldng it easier for a Landlord to charge extra fees and fines in a NONSTANDARD RENTAL
PROVISION (NVis. Sta ts. 704.28) — Wneir a landlord wants the tenant to waive their lights and allow the
laullord to take extra fees and charges ont of a seemity deposit, the landlord no longer has to separately discuss
these rights rvithn the tenant. They must still list these on a separate piece of paper titled NONSTANDARD
RENTAL PRO1 %IS IONS and have the tenant simr or initial eachn one.
7. Landlord has more time to return security deposit after eviction O'4Vis. Stets. 704.28(4) and A.TCP
134.06(2)) — After all eviction, the landlord could now keep a : ecurity deposit for up to 21 clays after they re-
rent the apar or thre lease ends, not? 1 clays after the writ of restitution is executed or the landlord learlis
that the tenant has vacated.
S. Commercial leases don't have to follow security deposit rules (ZVis. Stats. 704.28).
9. Rental agreements no longer void and unenforceable for certain provision (Wis. Stats. 704.44(9) —The
law use to state that a rental agreennent tiwas void an u neliforceable if the landlord included a rule holding the
tenant responsible for criminal activity committed on the rental property which was beyond the tenant's control.
10. Double damages in Wis. 5tats. 704 are only for security deposit issues or illegal lease clauses (704.95).
Previously, ainy violatioll of Chapter 7 04 was an unfair trade practice under Wis, State. 100.20 and could be
entitled to double dcuiiages.
11. Faster return date for eviction actions (799,20(4)) — hi small claims actions, the return date (court date)
has to be set 8 — 30 clays after it is issued, In eviction actiol>zc, it is 5 to 30 days. This law clialiaes the return date
for eviction actions to 5 to 14 days.
12. Agents of the landlord no longer practicing law without a license OVis. S to ts. 799.06(2)) -- Eilnployees,
agents of tlue nienlber, and ineinbers of landlord coniPailies call now start an eviction action and represent the
landlord legally in eviction actions and in small claiims court.
13. No personal service for summons and complain in eviction actions (Wis. Stets. 799.12(2) — Court; can
allow service of the quniniong by mail,
14. Speeding up the hearing date in eviction actions OVis. Stets. 799.206(3)) — If the eviction will be
contested, the courts inust schedule eviction hearings withiin 20 clays of the return date of the suninions.
Previously, this was "as soon as possible."
15. Changes to acceptance of rent or other payment in an eviction suction OVis. Stets. 799.40) —After
initiating an eviction action, if a landlord accepts rent or a»r payment from the tenant, they niay still pursue the
eviction. Previously the law just stated this for acceptance of rent
16. Court must issue writ of restitution within 5 days of the determination of eviction OVis. Stats. 799.44).
Previously this was 10 clays froin the judgment. of eviction,
17. Sheriff is responsible for all notices about property required in an eviction action Stats. 799.45)
— Landlords are not responsible for giving notices about property disposition.
19. Landlords can't be held liable for references they give about previous tenants. — This new law will state
that landlords are assiuned to be acting in good faith when giving references and will not be liable, uuiless tenant
can prove otherwise by clear rid convincing evidence.
20. Preemptions may revoke local control governing required landlord communication, expenses and fees
in the lease, and other ordinances. Tlus bill would snake it so that no city, village, tow11, or coun inay enact
all ordinance that: 1. Limits atenant's responsibility, or a landlord's right to recover expellees, fee;, or damages
due under the contract (e.g. limits oil late fees or liability for pest infestations), 2. Requires a landlord to
communicate to tenants or local govelnluent any infouliation that is not require to be communicated under
federal or state law (e.g. landlord registries and cllronlc nuisance citations).
For more information contact Tenant Resource Center
1202 Williamson Street, Suite 102, Madison, X47 53 703
Monday — Friday, 9A111— GPM
608 -357 -0143 1 asklrc itttenantre otirceceiiter.org
http://Nvispolitics.com/printerfriendly.iml?Articic
Tenant Resource Center: AB 183 will harm both tenants and landlords
5/13/2013
For Immediate Release May 13, 2013
Contact: Rudy Moore: 608 -695 -9333
Charlie Breunig: 608 -692 -6122
Tenant Resource Center Board of Directors Speaks Out in Opposition of Bill Being Voted on
Tomorrow
The Tenant Resource Center Board of Directors is proud of its long - standing service to both tenants
and landlords throughout Wisconsin and does not often weigh in on legislative matters that benefit
either tenants or landlords. However, AB 183 is so harmful to both tenants and landlords that the
Tenant Resource Center is taking a position against it.
"I'm a landlord and serve on the TRC board. I am very concerned that this bill is misleading for
landlords. In the end, it may result in more lawsuits, longer court cases, and worse outcomes for both
parties due to many misunderstandings of what these laws do," said Rudy Moore, attorney and
President of the Board of Directors.
2011 Wis. Act 108 went into effect in December 2011 and preempted a portion of Madison and Dane
County laws. Act 143 went into effect in March 2012 and affected tenant — landlord relationships
statewide. AB 183 makes more than 20 additional changes to local Madison law, as well as 20 further
changes statewide.
During the Assembly Housing and Real Estate Committee hearings and executive session, it became
clear that no tenants, tenant attorneys, or bipartisan housing groups had been consulted on this bill, and
only a small handful of realtors who are landlords had even been included.
The 21 -page AB 183 was circulated for sponsors on Monday, April 29, and scheduled for a hearing at
the Assembly Housing and Real Estate Committee three days later on Thursday, May 2. It was
scheduled for a vote on Thursday, May 9 with an additional six -page amendment released on Tuesday,
May 7. The bill will go to the Assembly floor tomorrow, Tuesday, May 14, two weeks after it was first
introduced.
"The sponsors are rushing this bill through the Assembly and not giving anyone a chance to analyze its
possible effects. Last year with Act 143 they made :mistakes they're trying to correct now, but I'm
afraid they're making new mistakes," said Charlie Breunig, Treasurer of the board of directors and
volunteer housing counselor for the Tenant Resource Center. "Several Iandlords and their attorneys
testified at the Assembly hearing that tweaks were needed, but we think this bill needs more than
tweaks."
1 of 3 5/23/2013 9:01 AM
PRESS RELEASES
http: //w i spoli tics. conVprinterfriendly .iml ?Article=296749
Contrary to its intent, this bill will cause more confusion and delays in eviction proceedings. It imposes
impractical time restrictions on local courts, landlords, and sheriff's departments, and also removes
mandatory third -party oversight of property left behind. These changes to the eviction process pose
new risks to tenants. In one possible scenario, tenants could be served a five -day eviction notice for
nonpayment of rent, pay it in full one day after it expires, never receive the summons and complaint
which can now simply be mailed to them, still be evicted before the month is even over, and before the
landlord comes back from the eviction hearing find that the landlord has towed their vehicle and
thrown away all of their property.
According to Eagle Movers, a professional bonded moving company that has done evictions in
Milwaukee for 40 years, the new option for Iandlords to remove a tenant's property themselves is
extremely problematic for landlords. In a statement released on Wednesday, May 8, they explained that
it will result in increased police contact to resolve disputes when the landlord disposes of property, and
there will actually be more costs for landlords who try to avoid this by asking for the sheriff's
oversight, which will now be less efficient without the required presence of professionals.
"I'm glad our board has decided to follow in the City of Madison's footsteps," says Brenda Konkel,
Executive Director of the Tenant Resource Center. "On Tuesday, May 7, the Common Council and
Mayor Soglin unanimously sponsored and supported a resolution against this bill. This isn't a matter of
being on the side of tenants or landlords. It's more a matter of creating good laws that make sense and
that people can easily understand and follow. That is not happening here."
For the City of Madison it is also an issue of local control. AB 183 will have an impact on more than 20
Madison General Ordinances, which Alder Lisa Subeck described as simple consumer protections.
AB183 would remove these protections by preempting any Madison ordinance that asks the landlord to
communicate with tenants, so landlords will no longer have to tell applicants whether they will use
minim income requirements or why their rental applications were denied, or inform a tenant moving
in that there are penalties in the City of Madison for misusing the smoke alarms. Or do something as
simple as providing the tenant a phone number.
Additionally, Alder Lauren Cnare summed it up talking about AB 183 by saying, "This is just asking
landlords and property owners of multi - family houses to provide common courtesies and generally
behave yourself well in the community.... This is really more than just being mean to renters, it's about
ruining communities." The Tenant Resource Center agrees: this bill is extremely detrimental to tenants
and landlords alike, and as Cnare suggests, it will be harmful to communities as well.
Please see below for a detailed explanation of what the bill would do.
Learn how AB 183 might effect your housing experience in Madison, Fitchburg, and/or Dane County
here
For statewide tenants and landlords, a more detailed account of how some of these changes can effect
you can be found here
This is an analysis of the amendment to be considered in the Assembly Housing and Real Estate
Committee does.
2 of 3 5/23/2013 9:01 AM