We had a great Manufactured Housing Coalition meeting in Eugene on October 24th. Together, tenants and landlords of marinas and manufactured housing parks are getting closer to a bill for 2019.
We have asked Senator Prozanski to sponsor our bill and have already submitted to him the topics which we either have already come to an agreement on, or which we believe we are close enough to reach agreement on very soon.
If tenants and landlords can reach agreement before the deadline, then Senator Prozanski will sponsor our bill.
If tenants and landlords cannot reach agreement before the deadline, then we will pull our bill.
With the deadline approaching, now is the time to think through what we really want and need, and make real compromises to get there so that there is a bill which can be voted on in 2019.
Following is a summary of topics we discussed and made some progress on for our 2019 bill.
- Extend the sunset on the capital gains exemption for park owners who sell their parks to residents or nonprofits.
- Extend the sunset on the $5,000 tax credit for park residents displaced by park closure.
- Converting optional mediation between landlords and tenants (see ORS 90.610 (2)) into mandatory mediation, with fees for failing to mediate in good faith; inclusion of tenant versus tenant disputes; add a provision or enforcement by a state agency or private lawyer for a limited number of more serious landlord violations.
- Revise/improve the current submeter installation law (ORS 90.531-90.539)
- Clarify the current termination stature (ORS 90.630) to require a tenant to cure a distinct/separate violation (e.g., a loud party) right away, rather than at the end of the 30 day notice period (see, e.g., ORS 90.392 (4) (a) (B)); clean up the statute to prevent its use to terminate for minor violations; allow landlords to impose fees instead for minor violations.
- Add marina tenancies to coverage by the Manufactured Communities Resource Center for education and mediation purposes, and require marina owners to register with the state and get the same mandatory continuing education that is imposed on park landlords; see ORS 90.732, .734. Also require marina tenants to pay the same annual $10 special assessment that park tenants pay, pursuant to ORS 446.525. (May require a new section regarding floating homes?) – and more which we are working to find agreement on soon
- Trees: Amend ORS 90.727 (3) (b) to require that the landlord’s notice to the tenant specify which tree the landlord intends to maintain or fell.
Following is a summary of the day’s discussions which get us closer to agreement.
- An overview of topics to be discussed at the Marina Issues Subcommittee meeting on October 31 in Tigard. John VanLandingham will be drafting possible agreement draft bill language before and after that meeting.
- Dispute resolution issue – We are making progress in creating a process and language which can be supported by both landlords and tenants.
- We largely agree to require all rental agreements, current and new, to require mandatory mediation for disputes.
- We largely agree on mandatory mediation required for
- (1) tenant-initiated complaints against landlord, even as a reaction to tenant receipt of certain limited termination notices, provided the tenant initiates mediation within a certain amount of time and not as an eviction-delay tactic. Many courts already require mandatory mediation prior to a hearing as it is.
- (2) tenant-initiated complaints against tenants because the landlords feel responsible for keeping the peace. An example of a tenant versus tenant issue should be when T-A confiscates a ball belonging to T-B which was thrown into T-A’s yard by T-B and T-A refuses to return it. Or T-A has a security camera pointed at T-B. These sorts of issues between neighbors can spiral out of control and Ts ask Ls for assistance. However, in 2017-18, only 7% of all mediation in parks was T vs. T. And a large percentage of Ts do not show up for voluntary mediation unless there is a consequence.
- (3) Landlord-initiated complaints against tenants. Even though Ls have many tools including terminations, it is hoped that providing an ORS tool as an alternative to frightening termination notices will encourage L’s to communicate with their T, rather than jump to sending a termination notice.
- Marina tenancies would be included, provided the subcommittee reaches agreement (which currently appears as though it should happen)
- Exceptions: some counties do not have their own dispute resolution centers (DRC), but some are able to use the centers from adjacent counties. Columbia County is a county that does not have its own center. Need to verify if Columbia County can use an adjacent county’s center.
- Process:
- Complainant must write letter to the person they wish to mediate with, describing the issue, and allowing the other party at least 10 days to respond.
- A copy of the letter must be given to the MCRC and report the result of the contact before MCRC may refer the matter to a DRC.
- Request for mediation shall come through MCRC.
- MCRC may try to resolve the issue themselves.
- Parties may bring a friend, attorney or support person to mediation – as long as both parties agree.
- All parties present at the mediation must sign a confidentiality agreement.
- At least one mediation must take place, but a resolution is not guaranteed. Both parties must act in good faith.
- If mediation is successful, require all parties to sign a resolution agreement.
- Send a copy of signed agreement to MCRC. This could be enforced in court if either party fails to perform.
- If one party fails to attend mediation, then penalties will be in place. We are currently discussing what those penalties will be – a fee equal to one month rent, and/or an FED defense in eviction court, and/or the ability to not be able to claim prevailing party attorneys fees if the issue goes to court.
- Some issues will likely be excluded from mandatory mediation – rent increases, park closures, possibly outrageous conduct under 90.396, sale of the park/marina, domestic violence, sexual assault, etc may all be excluded.
- Issues which are too large or controversial to mediate, we are still working through possible resources who can help low-income tenants get legal help. We are having a tough time getting an existing agency to be willing to devote resources to this, but we are still exploring a solution.
- Park tenants currently pay $10 per year and parks landlords pay $25 or $50 (depending on park size) to fund the MCRC and optional mediation program through MCRC. This has resulted in a surplus so far. If we make mediation mandatory, our surplus could result in a shortage. We are considering raising the assessment for landlords to $50 or $100. Adding the marina tenants and landlords to the MCRC will result in more funds, but also potentially more usage.
- No final decisions have been made, but we are definitely progressing toward agreement for each of these.
- Termination of tenancy/fees issue – 9th draft, dated 9/18/18, previously distributed but not discussed so carried over.
- We will clarify language in ORS 90.630 regarding the following:
- We will make it clear that a landlord cannot terminate a lease for minor rule violations.
- We will make a distinction between ongoing rule infractions and one-time infractions and adjust termination notice times accordingly…for example, you may have 30 days to figure out how to stop your barking dog, but you will have to stop partying loudly immediately to avoid a termination notice.
- We will require the notice to state whether or not the infraction ins a continuous or ongoing the of infraction – so that it is clear to the tenant when they must stop in order to meet the cure requirements.
- We will require termination notices to state clearly the time, date, place and circumstance for receiving the termination notice.
- We will require notices specific at least one option the tenant can do to cure the cause.
- We are considering treating pets infractions differently so as to not endanger the life of a pet…ceasing unwanted pet behavior (such as barking) within 30 days would often result in giving up the pet or evicting the pet owner.
- We are considering allowing warning notices and fees as an alternative to termination notices for minor infractions which cause fear in tenants.
- We will clarify language around committing a second violation, cure timing, and termination.
- We are discussing requiring that a termination notice can only be sent if there is a material violation OR if the tenant committed the same minor rule violation up to 3 times per year with warnings and established fees paid.
- We are still working through the complexities of terminating a lease because a tenant didn’t pay fees. The law allows a park or marina landlord to terminate a lease for nonpayment of a fee, but landlords don’t feel the law is clear enough.
- We have discussed various solutions including:
- Providing for escalating fee amounts for nonpayment of fees
- 3 strikes and you are out rule for nonpayment of fees – no cure
- Doing nothing and accept that sometimes judges don’t flow the law for either side.
- This will be discussed further at the next meeting.
- We have discussed various solutions including:
- We will clarify language in ORS 90.630 regarding the following:
We are making great progress for tenant rights in marinas regarding terminations and dispute resolution. Consider attending the next meeting in Tigard and participating in the process. It helps to hear from marina tenants and how the various proposed legislative changes affect them specifically.
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETINGS:
***We added an additional January meeting because we are so close and need just alit more time to finalize all proposed bill language before February of 2019.
- November 20, Tigard
- December 18, Salem
- January 15, Salem