Feb 22

[Thank you to Joe Murray for the research]

First, let me preface this that in general, I feel that Governor Evers has done well in the distribution of housing aid during the pandemic.

However, his proposed budget has a number of concerning provisions.  And how the heck does Wisconsin allows laws unrelated to spending to be part of a budget is well beyond me.

  • If passed, municipalities will be able to restrict how you screen, what you can charge, prohibit showing occupied units, making certain you lose a month or more between tenants, limit charging for damages, limit or prohibit security deposits and allow for rent abatement for minor issues.  
  • If passed municipalities will also be able to enact their own eviction moratoriums.
  • If passed, you will be inhibited from evicting for criminal activity. That should make other renters and neighbors feel safe — Not!  
  • If passed you can be required to disclose code violations “regardless of whether the landlord has actual knowledge of the violation

Actual details are below.  
—————————— 
Local landlord-tenant ordinances

Current law prohibits political subdivisions from enacting certain ordinances relating to landlords and tenants. Political subdivisions may not do any of the following:

1. Prohibit or limit landlords from obtaining or using certain information relating to a tenant or prospective tenant, including monthly household income, occupation, rental history, credit information, court records, and social security numbers.

2. Limit how far back in time a landlord may look at a prospective tenant’s credit information, conviction record, or previous housing.

3. Prohibit or limit a landlord from entering into a rental agreement with a prospective tenant while the premises are occupied by a current tenant.

4. Prohibit or limit a landlord from showing a premises to a prospective tenant during a current tenant’s tenancy.

5. Place requirements on a landlord with respect to security deposits or earnest money or inspections that are in addition to what is required under administrative rules.

6. Limit a tenant’s responsibility for any damage to or neglect of the premises.

7. Require a landlord to provide any information to tenants or to the local government any information that is not required to be provided under federal or state law.

8. Require a residential property to be inspected except under certain circumstances.

9. Impose an occupancy or transfer of tenancy fee on a rental unit.

10. Current law also prohibits political subdivisions from regulating rent abatement in a way that permits abatement for conditions other than those that materially affect the health or safety of the tenant or that substantially affect the use and occupancy of the premises. 

The budget bill eliminates all of these prohibitions.

Local moratorium on evictions

Current law prohibits political subdivisions from imposing a moratorium on landlords from pursuing evictions actions against a tenant. 

The budget bill eliminates that prohibition.

Notification of building code violations

Under current law, before entering into a lease with or accepting any earnest money or a security deposit from a prospective tenant, a landlord must disclose to the prospective tenant any building code or housing code violations of which the landlord has actual knowledge if the violation presents a significant threat to the prospective tenant’s health or safety. The bill eliminates the condition that the landlord have actual knowledge of such a violation and that the threat to the prospective tenant’s health or safety be “significant”; under the bill, the landlord must disclose to a prospective tenant a building code or housing code violation, regardless of whether the landlord has actual knowledge of the violation, if the violation presents a threat to the prospective tenant’s health or safety.

The budget bill eliminates these provisions.

Terminating a tenancy on the basis of criminal activity

Current law allows a landlord, upon providing notice to a tenant, to terminate the tenant’s tenancy, without an opportunity to cure the tenant’s default, if the tenant, a member of the tenant’s household, or a guest of the tenant 1) engages in any criminal activity that threatens the health or safety of other tenants, persons residing in the immediate vicinity of the premises, or the landlord; 2) engages in any criminal activity that threatens the right to peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other tenants or persons residing in the immediate vicinity of the premises; or 3) engages in any drug-related criminal activity on or near the premises. 

The budget bill eliminates these provisions.

Feb 08

You are permitted to forbid smoking in your units and in fact HUD has forbidden smoking in public housing since February 2017, mandatory since July 2018. HUD specifically forbids marijuana, as even though some states purport to have legalized its use, it is still federally illegal.

The Public Health Law Center has a great Q&A on this that states

Q: Can tenants smoke marijuana in multi-unit apartment buildings if they live in states where the use of medical or recreational marijuana is legal?

A: There is no absolute right to smoke medical or recreational marijuana in any state, especially when smoking impacts others. Secondhand smoke, whether from combustible or aerosolized tobacco or marijuana products, spreads throughout multi-unit dwellings. A recent U.S. study reports that even in multi-unit buildings where smoke-free policies were enforced, 50 percent of residents experienced smoke entering into their units from adjacent units. Multi-unit residential property owners have the legal authority to make their properties smoke- free, which includes prohibiting the smoking or vaping of medically prescribed marijuana in individual units and common areas, even in jurisdictions in which the use of medical marijuana is permitted by state law.

https://publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Marijuana-in-Multi-Unit-Residential-Setting-2019-1.pdf

Feb 05

At my company, we have tenants on bi-weekly, weekly, and alternative pay dates because I have long known the cost to us when a renter fails.

The alternative pay date can be a legal gotcha under Fair Housing. Let’s say a renter receives Social Security Disability, and their check arrives on the 3rd of the month and you have a pay before the 1st policy that has a late fee or unrealized discount after the 1st. If the renter asks you to change their due date to the 4th so that they can receive their payment and get it to you and you refuse this “reasonable accommodation” or may be in violation of Fair Housing.

preload preload preload