Search

Answer:  This is an issue that the Oregon Residential Landlord Tenant Act (“ORLTA” or the “Act”) is not fully equipped to address. Nowhere in the Act is there a clear answer. But connecting some dots, I think we can arrive at a logical answer.  

 

· Technically, the 18-year old is not a tenant under the manufactured housing park (“MHP”) side of the Act, since he does not “own” the home. At best, he is a “tenant” under the non-MHP side of the law – he could be considered a month-to-month tenant, and therefore subject to the 30-day right of termination by the landlord.  Assuming this, what is the landlord to do?  First, do the rules permit subleasing?  If not, he could be compelled to leave. 

· Second, rent should not be accepted from him until this situation is clarified and a solution reached.

· Third, if the landlord is willing to accept the 18-year old under these circumstances (i.e. assuming he goes into title), he could be offered a monthly tenancy, subject to his qualifying under the community rules, etc. which, of course, require the background check, etc.  

· Lastly, again assuming the landlord is willing to accept him, a guarantee by the parents might be in order.  

· Keep in mind that since he was not a signatory to the original rental agreement since he was a minor, the fact that he is the only person remaining at the home, technically makes him an authorized occupant that has not yet been approved by park management. This is your strongest card, and you should use it to fashion the solution that best fits your needs.

 

All of these things require some legal guidance, but the answer to the above question is that the landlord, by acting carefully, should be able to protect his position and either require the 18-year old to vacate or qualify in all respects as a new resident (assuming he goes into ownership of the home).  In all cases a background check is not only appropriate, but essential.

By The Editorial Board (Wall Street Journal)  Jan. 5, 2020 5:35 pm ET

Politicians bemoan the lack of affordable housing, but their policies often create the problem. Look no further than Oregon, where restrictive zoning and mandates have yielded the lowest rate of residential construction in decades.

To read the complete editorial click the pdf file above.

Editor's Note:  The following article was provided by Northwest ark Brokerage. For more information on manufactured home communities for sale or an assessment of your community call Bill Jackson of Northwest Park Brokerage at (206) 652-4100 or email Bill at: billj@nwparks.com.  

*****

Everybody is wondering what type of year 2020 will shape up to be.  Elections, international unrest, political infighting, tariffs, taxes and a laundry list of other issues has kept everyone guessing.  None of us know what the future will bring, but in the housing industry two things will help us stay healthy and grow steadily – low interest rates and a strong economy.  

 

CAP RATES. From what we have seen recently CAP rates can vary greatly, depending on the age and quality of the park/community and its location. 

 

Low interest rates combined with rising Net Operating Incomes are minimizing CAP rates in most areas of the country.  Coastal metropolitan areas account for lower CAP rates than other regions, where quality, larger communities are demanding CAP rates in the 4% range, and some have been sub-4%.  Buyers target high caliber parks in this CAP rate range, and they sell within weeks of listing.  This is something we haven’t seen before but there is limited inventory available for buyers targeting quality larger communities, and as private housing costs rise out of reach for many residents, demand for manufactured housing communities will continue to compress CAP rates.  If you are a potential seller of a larger quality community, we would love to talk to you.  We have the buyers.  Older communities in rural areas on septic systems and wells have seen CAP rates as high as the 7% range, but if they can be converted to central, local utilities they have a potential and there is still a strong demand for these properties.

 

INTEREST RATES.  In December the Federal Reserve signaled that it wants to hold off on further interest rate cuts for a while.  At its last meeting the Fed kept the federal funds rate between 1.5% and 1.75%.  Fed Chair Jerome Powell has been in his current position since November 2, 2017 and he expects that the economy will remain stable, but again emphasized that the future path of Fed actions will depend on many different possible events.  

 

The bond market has also been very stable, as rates have changed very little over the past few months.  The yield curve – the gap between rates on short-term and long-term bonds has maintained its historically normal upward sloping line.  This indicates that investors are not worried much about a possible recession occurring this year or next. 

 

If the economy slows the Fed will have a much smaller margin of error.  If market turmoil develops (think war or trade challenges) then the Fed will likely cut rates at least one more time.  However, that could result in the Fed gradually raising rates in 2021 according to a variety of economists and prognosticators. 

 

THE ECONOMY. Most economists seem to agree that the 2020 economy will look much like the 2019 economy.  Long gone are the days of 2007-2009 where real estate foreclosures and bank closures (remember Washington Mutual?) where the daily headline.  Today businesses are by-in-large doing well, unemployment is low, liquidity is plentiful, the stock market is steadily setting new records and many economists believe things will actually get even better in 2021.  The biggest area of uncertainty remains international trade and if that clears up 2020 might even be better than expected.

 

The “demand side” of the economy will be a little subpar, giving a small break to the supply side.  But when spending improves the supply limitations of low labor force growth and slow productivity growth will diminish, leading to increasing demand for products and services and a demand-supply balance.  Households are growing their incomes slightly more than they are growing their spending.  As a result, the savings rate is moving slowly upward.  That’s ideal, as a higher savings rate puts the economy on a more sustainable path.

 

Finally, the growth of income and spending has not been as great in 2019 as in 2018 because job gains are lower.  That results from the tight labor market.  Businesses would hire more if they could find additional qualified workers.  Wages have not risen much, so the income growth rate is lower than back in 2018.  However, the jobs picture is solid, leading to good incomes and a positive attitude among most consumers.  Look for them to continue growing their spending moderately in 2020 and into 2021.

 

Oregon Legislature

 

Senate Bill 586 Becomes Law on January 1, 2020

 

When Senate Bill 586 became law on 01/01/20 it amended several landlord-tenant laws.  Most industry representatives feel the new mediation aspects of this Bill are the most important. Notably, the provision that requires mandatory mediation if either the landlord or the tenant initiates a request for mediation.  They are most likely to be disputes relating to compliance with the rental agreement or modifications in the rules or regulations within the community. 

 

Interestingly, there are a number of types of disputes excluded from mandatory mediation, unless both parties agree otherwise.  They include facility closures, facility sales, rent increases, rent payments and/or amounts due, unauthorized occupants, disputes involving domestic violence or sexual assaults and disputes arising from termination of tenancy under ORS Chapter 90 (Oregon’s Residential Landlord-Tenant Law). 

 

If a community has a mediation policy, it must include a detailed process and format to initiate mediation, the names and contact information for mediation services made available by the Housing and Community Services Department, a clause stipulating that all communications during the mediation process be held in strict confidence, and it may include specific disputes between the landlord and one or more tenant, or a dispute between two or more tenants. 

 

All parties must participate in the mediation by making a good faith effort to schedule mediation within (30) days after it is initiated, attending and participating in the mediation process and cooperating with reasonable requests of the mediator. 

 

Californians Are Moving North

 

A new study by United Van Lines shows California is ranked among the top 10 of “most moved from states” last year, coming in at number 7.  One of the hot spots people are moving to?  Boise, Idaho.  According to the Boise Valley Economic Partnership, in a span of about five years approximately 7,200 Californians have moved to the Boise area.  And if you have visited Boise recently you can attest to this fact by navigating their increasing crowded roadways, bustling restaurants and newly constructed hotels, motels and shops. 

 

Forbes Magazine recently named Boise as the fastest growing metro area in the US, crediting the area’s robust tech sector and job growth.  The median home price is Boise is $332,698.  In San Francisco?  $1,325,000. 

  

Gas prices in Boise are a dollar less than in California and most of the other typical items that make up a family’s cost of living are all significantly less in Idaho.  Also, manufacturers are attracted to the Treasure Valley because of the favorable climate and geological attributes.  Boise is not an area where floods, earthquakes, tornados and hurricanes are a threat, and large companies find that very appealing when investing in large brick-and-mortar factories, data centers and distribution hubs.

 

Oregon is experiencing the same migration, but it’s been going on much longer.  Californians disproportionally move to southern and central Oregon when compared to other parts of the country.  Southern Oregon has been growing at a rate of about 5% per year, but 12% of net migration is from California.  Most other Californians move to the Portland area and the Willamette Valley.  On average 39,320 Californians move to Oregon annually.  But an average of 19,523 Oregonians also make the move south, leaving Oregon with a net gain of 19,797 new residents from California every year.  Also, in central Oregon, Bend has seen a net gain in population from Washington state in recent years.  This is unusual, but in each of the past few years, central Oregon has gained population from all parts of Washington including the Seattle area and SW Washington. 

 

THE NORTHWEST BENEFIT

 

All of this data bodes very well for the housing industry and in particular the manufactured housing industry.  There is a severe housing shortage in Oregon and the Boise, Idaho region, as well as parts of Washington state.  Manufactured housing can provide a quick, affordable, well built and energy efficient housing solution to all these former Californians looking for a better life up north.  This is evidenced by recent reports of increased new and pre-owned manufactured home sales and production. Retailers and manufactures report solid 4th quarter sales and production results in Oregon, Washington and Idaho. 

 

CrossMod – A New Class of Manufactured Home

 

The Manufactured Housing Institute – MHI – recently introduced the official name for the new class of manufactured homes.  “CrossMod is a reflection of the industries commitment to elevate the industry by bringing the quality and innovation that can be found in all off-site built housing, including Manufactured Homes, Modular Homes and now CrossMod homes, to even more home buyers” MHI said in a prepared statement.   The term was developed with involvement from multiple professional agencies and teams of industry participants to serve as a mark of distinction for this new HUD code home category. 

 

“As housing affordability challenges continue to grow, families of all economic backgrounds are searching for attainable, high-quality homes that do not create an unsustainable financial burden.  CrossMod homes are place on a permanent foundation, qualify for conventional financing, help challenge exclusionary zoning ordinances and are virtually undistinguishable from higher-price, site-built options.  Best of all, this new class of off-site built home can be appraised using comparable site-built homes.” 

 

MHI partnered with market research firm Landor to test a variety of names directly with over 1,000 consumers.  Their impression of the term CrossMod included “modern and sleek”, “combines different models and styles”, “sounds secure and safe” and is an “innovative and smart home”  While just 9% of respondents said they would consider purchasing a manufactured home, 46% said they would purchase a CrossMod. 

 

Find out more at www.manufacturedhousing.org  

 

Financing a Manufactured Home Community

 

The latest interest rates for manufactured housing community financing or refinancing on West Coast remain at or near these rates, which continue to fluctuate and have remained steady in the past few weeks.  Here are some of the lowest rates available for $1 - $10 Million:

 

Three-year fixed 4.40%, five-year fixed 4.161%, seven-year fixed 4.255%, ten-year fixed, 4.366% and fifteen-year fixed at 4.322%.  ARM’s are as low as 2.9%.  Rates can be found as high as 5.483% for 20-year fixed rate loans and underwriting requires complete and detailed historical operation data. Rate locks are available up to 90-days prior to close in most cases. 

 

The larger REIT’s and investment funds continue to offer and expand a variety of tax-saving and tax-deferred structures to sellers interested in something other than a 1031 tax-deferred “up leg” exchange or an all-out cash transaction.  Resident purchases are also on the rise.

 

4th Quarter Production Rises

 

According to official statistics compiled on behalf of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and verified by the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR), HUD Code manufactured home production increased in October of 2019 according to the latest reports.  Just released statistics indicate that HUD Code manufacturers produced 9,415 homes in October 2019, up a strong 9.6% from the 8,588 new HUD Code manufactured homes produced during October of 2018. 

 

On a cumulative basis industry production for 2019 totaled 79,912 HUD Code homes, a decline of 3.6% from the 82,942 HUD Code homes produced during the same period in 2018. While this marks a decline in year-over-year production and shipments and margin has narrowed and industry experts are predicting stronger production and shipment numbers in 2020 as a result of newly introduced products and increased consumer awareness of the affordability and quality of today’s manufactured home. 

 

For more information on manufactured home communities for sale or an assessment of your community call Bill Jackson of Northwest Park Brokerage at (206) 652-4100 or email Bill at: billj@nwparks.com

As was reported by Chuck Carpenter during the Legislative session, the goal from MHCO’s perspective, was to use the coalition to get the best possible result considering the political landscape in the Legislature. Bluntly, some of the original ideas proposed by the tenants in the coalition were quite onerous. The end result, however, is a true compromise that is favorable to MHCO landlords, all things considered.

If you would like to learn more about these issues and/or you have particular questions, please join me for my presentation at the 2019 Annual Conference in October. In the meantime here are 16 questions and answers that will get you started.

1. What does mediation mean? Mediation is an alternative dispute resolution process that is different from going to court and having a judge (or jury) pick a winner and loser by determining the facts and applying the law to the facts. Mediation is also different from arbitration. At an arbitration, the parties typically pick a person (usually an attorney) to act like a judge and determine the facts and apply law. At an arbitration there is also a winner and a loser. 

 

In mediation, the parties typically pick a third party neutral who will meet with the parties to help them find a solution to resolve a dispute. Because mediation requires the agreement of the parties to come to a resolution, it is not always successful. Mediation does not limit a party’s ability to file a lawsuit or arbitration.

 

In my experience, the cases that resolve at mediation are where bothparties come with an open mind, are willing to listen and can consider compromise in order to avoid the cost and hassle of litigation. 

 

In my experience, the cases that don’t resolve are usually because one of the parties has unrealistic expectations or opinion of their case, or that the matter should move forward based on “principle.” 

 

 

2.   When is mediation required? Mediation is required for any non-exempt issues (see question 3) involving compliance with the rental agreement or non-exempt conduct of a landlord or a tenant within the facility. Please note that a facility is a manufactured home park or a floating home marina. Mediation can be initiated regarding a non-exempt dispute between a landlord and a tenant or between two or more tenants. Note that if the dispute is between two or more tenants, mediation must be initiated by the landlord. 

 

3.   What types of disputes are exempt (i.e. not subject to mediation)? The following disputes are not subject to mediation:

 

(a) Facility closures consistent with ORS 90.645 or 90.671; 

(b) Facility sales consistent with ORS 90.842 to 90.850; 

(c) Rent payments or amounts owed, including increases in rent consistent with ORS 90.600;

(d) Termination of tenancy pursuant to ORS 90.394 (failure to pay rent), 90.396 (24 hour notices), or 90.630(8) (three strike provision); 

(e) A dispute brought by a tenant who is alleged to be a perpetrator of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking under ORS 90.445 when the dispute involves either the allegation or the victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking; 

(g) A dispute involving a person not authorized to possess a dwelling unit as described in ORS 90.403; or 

(h) A dispute raised by the landlord or tenant after the tenancy has terminated and possession has been returned to the landlord (including ORS 90.675 (abandonments). 

 

4.   How is mediation initiated? Mediation maybe initiated by a tenant or a landlord. If a tenant or landlord initiates the mediation process, then the parties are required to participate (but see questions 7 and 8 below). If there is a dispute between or among tenants, a landlord mustinitiate mediation.  

 

5.   What if mediation is not currently included in my rental agreement? A landlord and/or tenant is required to mediate regardless of whether a rental agreement currently provides for mediation. If a rental agreement does not currently have such a process, SB 586 requires a landlord to unilaterally amend the rental agreement to include mediation. Specifically, ORS 90.510 (5) (what is required to be included in rental agreements) is amended to include in a rental agreement a section for mandatory mediation of disputes that states: “that the tenant or the landlord may request mandatory mediation of a dispute that may arise concerning the rental agreement or the application of this chapter, and the process by which a party may request mediation, including a link to the web site for the Manufactured and Marina Communities Resource Center with additional information about mandatory mediation of disputes.”

 

 6.  Who facilitates a mediation? Mediation may be requested through either: (1) Manufactured and Marina Communities Resource Center (“MMCRC”); or (2) a local Community Dispute Resolution Center (“CDRC”); or (3) a mutually agreed-upon and qualified mediator. Each party must cooperate with the CDRC or designated mediator in scheduling a mediation session at a mutually agreeable day and time, within 30 days of the initiation of mediation. Each party must attend at least one mediation session. 

 

7.   Who has to participate in the mediation (i.e. does it have to be the owner)?  A landlord can designate a representative to participate in the mediation on the Landlord’s behalf (including a non attorney). The representative, however, must have the authority to resolve the dispute in the mediation.  Note that a tenant can also designate a representative.

 

8.   Do I have to reach an agreement in the mediation?  No.Neither party is required to reach an agreement in a mediation. Each party must attempt to mediate the dispute in “good faith.”  The law specifically says that the parties are not required to: (1) reach an agreement on all or any issues in the mediation; (2) participate in more than one mediation session; (3) participate for an unreasonable length of time in a mediation session; or (4) participate if the other party is using the mediation to harass the party or is otherwise abusing the duty to meditate.

 

9.   What would happen if a party failed to meditate in good faith? If a party fails to meditate in good faith by abusing the right to require mediation or uses mediation to harass the other party, the aggrieved party may recover an amount equal to one month’s rent from the violating party. Please note that this is a two way street. In addition, the other party has a defense to any claim brought by the violating party over the dispute involved in the mediation request, and may have the claim dismissed.

 

10.Can I use an admission in mediation at a subsequent trial? Conversely, can something I say be used against me? No. Mediation, and what is said during mediation, is confidential. Any statement made in a mediation is inadmissible. The purpose is to have an honest dialogue in order to encourage a settlement. Additionally, a mediator cannot be called as a witness.

 

11.Can a tenant request a mediation after I send them a termination of tenancy notice?

Mediation can be requested after a notice terminating tenancy has been sent to a tenant, but only if the request is made to MMCRC or a designated mediator and a written confirmation of that request is delivered to you (the landlord) beforethe landlord files an action for possession under ORS 105.110. If the tenant delivers a notice requesting mediation before a landlord files an eviction action, the landlord may not file such action until after the mediation process concludes. If a landlord delivers a notice requesting mediation before a tenant files an action regarding a dispute, the tenant may not file such action until after the mediation process ends. 

 

12. Can I still accept rent during the mediation process?  Yes. Notwithstanding ORS 90.412, acceptance of rent or performance by a landlord after either party requests mediation and during the mediation process does not constitute waiver of the landlord’s right to terminate a tenancy following the mediation. Acceptance of rent or performance after the mediation process ends may constitute waiver. Additionally, all statutes of limitations are suspended during the mediation process. 

 

13.What happens after the mediation? If a mediation is successful, the parties should come to an agreement that resolves the dispute. The question is how enforceable is the agreement. Enforceability will depend upon the issues involved, the terms and how the agreement is drafted. I would encourage you to discuss with your legal counsel strategies on how to make the most of a mediation.For example, if an eviction action has already commenced, you may want to attempt to make the agreement a part of the ORS 105.148 mediation/agreement process. Another example is setting up an enforcement mechanism within the agreement itself.  

 

The CDRC or the designated mediator shall notify MMCRC of the successful or unsuccessful outcome of the mediation. The parties and the CDRC or mediator are not required to give a copy of any mediation agreement to MMCRC.

 

If a mediation is not successful, the parties may continue on the path they were on before the mediation. 

 

14.This sounds expensive, who is paying for it?Mediations will be performed by the existing network of CDRC mediators, funded by the existing annual assessment already paid by tenants ($10, collected with property tax assessments).  If the parties choose a private mediator, then the parties will have to determine how that mediator is paid. Additionally, the current annual fee paid by park landlords ($25 for parks of 20 spaces or fewer, $50 for larger parks) is doubled.

 

15. Very interesting (as always), Bill, but what’s this about $100,000 annual grant to the Oregon Law Center?As you may be aware, some states have allocated substantial funding to their state’s Justice Department or to create a team of private attorneys general to assist with enforcement of tenant rights. Similar systems were originally proposed by the tenants during coalition meetings and were strongly opposed by the landlord group. The ultimate compromise was a limited $100,000 per year grant to be given to the Oregon Law Centerto employ oneattorney to provide direct legal services to statewide park and marina residents on matters arising under the Oregon Residential Landlord Tenant Act.

 

16.Is mandatory mediation and the $100,000 per year in perpetuity? No. Both elements have a four-year sunset. An advisory committee has been created to monitor both elements, consisting of equal numbers of landlord and tenant representatives to present a report on the status of both elements to the 2021 and 2023 Legislatures to determine whether they should be renewed.

 

17. When does all of this go into effect? The effective date of SB 586 is January 1, 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

Answer:

It sounds like the tenant vacated without notice.  If that is the case, then you do not necessarily need to refund any rent to the tenant.

 

On a month-to-month rental agreement, as a landlord you are entitled to a 30-day written tenancy termination notice from the tenant before she is released from rent payments.  (ORS 90.427 (3)(a); ORS 90.220 (8)(f).)  Assuming the tenant did not give you a 30-day notice, you are entitled to rent for 30 days after the vacate date.  This means that you can keep any rent that she has already paid, plus take any remaining rent due for that 30-day period out of the security deposit (if you have one).

 

There is one caveat, however.  You do have an obligation to make reasonable efforts to re-rent the RV space.  (ORS 90.220 (8)(d); ORS 90.410 (3).)  If you are able to re-rent it, then the old tenancy terminates as of the date the new tenancy begins and you would be liable for returning the rent to the old tenant from that date forward.  (Note: You are not necessarily obligated to steer new tenants to the old tenant's vacant space. The reasonable practice would be to let any new tenants choose which vacant space they want on their own.)

 

The bottom line is that without a 30-day written vacate notice from the tenant, you can keep the rent until the space is re-rented to a new tenant.  You are then obligated to refund the remaining withheld rent to the previous tenant.  However, as usual, consult a knowledgeable attorney if any complications arise.

 

(FYI:  If you happen to have any written, week-to-week tenancy agreements, the same rules apply except that the 30-day notice period becomes a 10-day notice period.)

Answer. ORS 90.545(Fixed Term Tenancies) provides that unless you take action not less than 60 days prior to the end of the term, the lease becomes a month-to-month tenancy on the same conditions as the original lease. 

 

The only exception to this is for the landlord to submit a proposed new lease to the tenant at least 60 days prior to the ending date of the term. Any provisions that are new, i.e. not in the prior lease, are to be summarized in a written statement; the same applies if the landlord is going to create new community rules. Remember, however, that if there are substantive changes to either or both of these two sets of park documents, you may also have to issue a new Statement of Policy under ORS 90.510,[1]which is a summary explanation of certain park policies provided to new and existing residents.

 

If you introduce new lease terms or new rules, they must “(f)airly implement a statute or ordinance adopted after the creation of the existing agreement; or are the same as those offered to new or prospective tenants in the community.”

 

Note, however, that the new lease terms or rules cannot relate to the “…age, size, style, construction material or year of construction of the manufactured dwelling” *** and cannot “…require an alteration of the manufactured dwelling *** or new construction of an accessory building or structure.

 

The tenant must accept or reject the proposed new lease at least 30 days prior to the ending of the term by giving written notice to the landlord.

So, your choice on expiring leases under ORS 90.545 is: (a) To do nothing, in which case the lease morphs into a month-to-month tenancy on the same terms as the earlier lease, or (b) Introduce a new lease and/or rules that “(f)airly implement a statute or ordinance adopted after the creation of the existing agreement; or are the same as those offered to new or prospective tenants in the community.”

You do not have an option to notnon-renew the tenant at the end of a lease term.  This is not to say that you are limited in termination  for cause under: ORS 86.782(6)(c) (foreclosure trustee sale),90.380(5) (dwelling posted asunsafe by gov’t),90.392 (termination for cause),90.394 (termination forfailure to pay rent),90.396 (termination on 24-hour notice),90.398(termination drugs, alcohol),90.405 (termination, unpermitted pet),90.440(termination in group recovery facility)or90.445 (termination for criminalact).  

 

As to the summary, the statute simply says that “(t)he landlord shall include with the proposed agreement a written statement that summarizesany new or revised terms, conditions, rules or regulations.” (Emphasis added.)

 

However, since you will have many changes to the new lease, you ask about two possible alternatives: Either to send the new lease to the tenant: (a) and inform him/her it has numerous updates and they should read it as if it were a completely new edition; or (b) “…offer a redline version which they wouldn’t be able to read.”

 

ORS 90.130 provides:

 

Every duty under this chapter and every act which must be performed as a condition precedent to the exercise of a right or remedy under this chapter imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or enforcement.”

 

I read that to mean that good faith compliance is satisfactory in this case. Since ORS 90.545 does not elaborate about the written summary, I would opt for an approach that gives you more coverage rather than less. Both of your alternatives, especially (a) standing alone, could be attacked by residents as insufficient since it really doesn’t comply – if the goal is to inform and educate residents about the new changes. Alternative (a) is too little, and (b) is too much.

 

My view is that you don’t have to detail every single change, just the material ones that aid in understanding the nature and scope of the new provisions. Stylistic changes that do not alter the substance of the new text don’t need to be addressed. As to material changes, they should be summarized.

 

I would give the new lease to the residents together with a marked redline showing the material changes.[2]I would then include a distillation of the material changes in the new lease into categories and short summaries.

 

For example:

 

• Rule No. ___, Late Fees: they are going to increase from X$ to $Y;
• Rule No. ___, Pets: There will be a fine for pet violations;
• Rule No. ___, Mediation: Adds mediation rules under the recently enacted SB 586 Sec. 7 et seq. (2019) and provides that Landlord has the duty to mediate if requested by Tenant. See,https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Measures/Overview/SB586;
• Rule No. ___, Occupants: Tenants must now notify manager within X days of the person coming into the park and obtain a Temporary Occupancy Agreement.

 

Be sure the notice invites residents to contact the park manager if they have any questions. I believe this approach meets the spirit and intent of ORS 90.545, and is in good faith compliance with the law.  

 

Lastly, before sending out the notice, enlist the help of someone who is not privy to the changes, and ask them to read your summary. If they understand it (without your coaching), then send. If not, I would re-work the language until it is clear. The goal is to avoid ambiguity in the summary; but if reasonable minds can differ as to the meaning of the new summary, it is, per se’ambiguous, and needs to be clarified before sending.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Editor’s Note: The 2020 Oregon Legislative ‘Short Session’ began today.  The article below from “The Oregonian” gives a good summary of what to expect over the next 35 days.   Over the past 6 months since the end of the 2019 Oregon Legislative Session, MHCO worked to minimize the number of legislative proposals in the ‘short’ 2020 Legislative Session.  That effort appears to have paid off – with over 200 legislative proposals – none directly impact manufactured home communities – a rare respite.  That does not mean there won’t be significant – substantive proposals that will impact other concerns impacting you life.  

Oregon Legislature readies for session of big money votes, possible boycotts

By Hillary Borrud | The Oregonian/OregonLive and Ted Sickinger| The Oregonian/OregonLive and Fedor Zarkhin | The Oregonian/OregonLive

 

Oregon lawmakers return to the Capitol on Monday to open a short 35-day session. Already, they appear on the brink of another national headline-grabbing shutdown.

 

Republicans in both the House and Senate say they will flee the Capitol if necessary to stop a carbon cap-and-trade bill, just as Senate Republicans did in 2019. That could create an impasse from the get-go with supermajority Democrats, who have pledged to deliver the climate change bill this year.

Chief among those is Senate President Peter Courtney, who promised after he failed to lock down enough votes in his own caucus last year that he would stay on in his leadership role largely to see through the “unfinished business” of the climate bill in 2020.

 

Lawmakers now appear likely to start work without Courtney, who is still recovering from a hip infection. Sen. Elizabeth Steiner Hayward, a Multnomah County Democrat and co-chair of the Ways and Means Committee, said budget writers and the rest of the Senate are nonetheless well positioned going into the session thanks to Courtney’s work “putting people in the right (leadership) positions.”

 

“I would doubt he would be back on Monday,” Steiner Hayward said on Thursday. “But all of us who have been talking to him regularly, including me as a physician, have been encouraging him to take the time he needs to get his health back on track.”

 

Once again, Republican walkouts could also jeopardize other important legislative business. This time the central question is how to allocate roughly $490 million in windfall tax revenue state economists pinpointed after lawmakers wrote the 2019-21 budget, plus potentially more than $300 million in state bonding debt that public university leaders want for renovation and expansion projects on campuses around the state.

 

Steiner Hayward and the two other leaders of the Ways and Means committee said the additional revenue is all but spoken for, due to dire needs at the state’s child welfare agency, psychiatric hospital, forestry department and parole and probation programs.

That sets up a strategic quandary for Democrats, who must decide whether to first attempt to pass what environmentalists consider a long-overdue climate plan or instead focus on getting funding for homeless services, mental health and other priorities passed before taking up the carbon bill that could spark a shutdown.

In Salem, Mayor Chuck Bennett, who spent decades as a Capitol lobbyist, said he would prefer Democrats pick the latter strategy. “I would hope, I guess because it’s the first issue on our agenda and our community’s agenda dealing with homelessness and unsheltered individuals in the community, they would take this up first or very early,” Bennett said.

The capital city is hoping the state will supply several million dollars to help open a shelter, homeless navigation center and supportive shelter for people with serious mental illnesses. Bennett pointed out Salem is represented by lawmakers from both parties. “We would hate to see something like this get caught up in an unrelated issue or blocked by activities around an unrelated issue.”

Kotek said Thursday she expects Republicans to “show up to work” and that legislative business will proceed “in normal fashion.”

“I live in the present, I’m gonna take one day at a time,” Kotek said. “I’m going to work transparently and collaboratively with all members, including my Republican colleagues.”

Key deadlines to pass bills in the short session already loom: To stay alive, most bills must be scheduled for a work session by the end of the first week. A revenue forecast on Feb. 12 will inform budget choices, telling lawmakers whether they have more or less tax money to work with.

In a search for leverage against a shutdown, Democrats’ public employee union allies point to poll results that show a majority of likely voters oppose Senate Republicans’ two walkouts last year. On the strength of those statewide poll results, the unions are funding two ballot initiative campaigns to expel or fine lawmakers who shut down business at the Capitol for an extended period by walking out and denying a quorum.

That doesn’t sway Senate Republican Leader Herman Baertschiger Jr. of Grants Pass, who said on Wednesday that GOP senators commissioned their own polling in Republican-held districts and “I think we’re gonna be fine.” The biggest message from constituents, including in swing districts in south Salem and Bend? “Stop cap-and-trade, by far,” Baertschiger said.

Other highly charged issues could also fuel partisan tensions. For example, Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie, has introduced a bill to ban coyote hunting contests. A similar proposal last year largely divided the Senate along partisan lines, with a couple Democrats joining all but one Republican in voting “no” before it died in the House. Two gun control bills have also been filed this session. One would require owners to lock up their guns when they’re not in use and another would allow local governments to forbid people with concealed-carry licenses to carry guns in public buildings, including the Capitol, schools and hospitals.

Democrats’ top priority this session, the cap and trade climate bill, has a few new wrinkles designed to keep Republicans in the building.

The carbon pricing framework in last year’s House Bill 2020, known as the Clean Energy Jobs bill, would remain largely intact. It would limit greenhouse gas emissions and require most big polluters including gas and diesel sellers and manufacturers to buy increasingly scarce “allowances” to emit carbon, giving them an incentive to choose greener options.

 

But backers say they’ve made significant changes to lessen the impact on rural Oregonians and industrial firms – two sources of loud opposition in 2019.

The first is a geographic phase-in of carbon pricing for gas and diesel. It would hit the Portland area in 2022 and smaller metro areas in 2025 but exempt more rural areas until at least 19 counties opt into the program, which may never happen.

Industrial companies, meanwhile, would only be regulated on the emissions generated by their industrial processes, not the natural gas they burn, cutting the number of firms directly affected from 30 to about 11.

Backers added other enticements, including using a significant chunk of the money from the sale of allowances for forest restoration efforts, a potential source of jobs and capital in rural areas.

Whether these tweaks are enough to bring reluctant Democrats aboard, much less keep Republicans in the Capitol, remains to be seen. The changes were enough to win the support of Sen. Arnie Roblan, D-Coos Bay, a holdout last time around. And the new bill makes a specific accommodation for Boeing, which may win the vote of Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson, whose last-minute flip-flopping helped kill the bill last year.

 

Republicans and some industrial lobbyists have nonetheless reprised their sky is falling rhetoric, and the prospect of a walkout to prevent passage of this bill is very much on the table.

Vaping will also be on the legislative docket, with bills that would ban all flavored products and a bill that would ban internet e-cigarette sales. The bills are intended to curb youth addiction to nicotine and come in the wake of a national vaping-related lung illness epidemic that has killed 60 people nationally and two in Oregon. The vast majority of the lung illnesses nationally are connected to illegal marijuana products, but nicotine vape liquids are still considered a possible culprit in some cases.

Top Democrats overseeing budget adjustments all pledged not to touch an extra $500 million cushion built into the current budget to guard against an economic downturn.

Rep. Dan Rayfield, a Corvallis Democrat who is also a co-chair of Ways and Means, said the budget committee will be highly skeptical of any requests that would grow future state budgets, since agencies use staffing and program levels from the second year of a biennium as a starting point to calculate their future budgets. “You have to be very conscious about the fact that spending mid-biennium can really cost the state and put you in a rough situation a year from now,” Rayfield said.

That hasn’t stopped Oregon leaders from amassing a wealth of ideas for how to spend the money mid-budget cycle. Gov. Kate Brown wants additional money for earthquake preparedness and $40 million for international track and field championships set to take place in Eugene in 2021. House Speaker Tina Kotek, a Portland Democrat, wants $120 million to pay for shelters and other services to address the state’s homelessness crisis, including some of the state’s borrowing capacity to pay for affordable housing preservation and construction.

Lawmakers must also decide whether to guarantee K-12 schools and early childhood education programs will receive their full $1 billion from a new business tax. That would require the state to spend more income tax money on schools if proceeds from the new business tax falls short of state economists’ predictions.

“The schools are crying for money,” Baerstchiger said, referring to a push by lobbyists for the state teachers union, including House District 36 candidate Laurie Wimmer.

Sen. Betsy Johnson, a Scappoose Democrat and co-chair of the Ways and Means Committee, described the teachers’ pitch only as a “request.” But Kotek described it as a done deal, saying lawmakers will set aside $50 million from the general fund for lawmakers to dispense if the business tax comes up short.

Another priority for Brown is to pass legislation to bolster the state’s wildfire preparedness. She is looking for a significant chunk of money - as much as $200 million annually to fund forest restoration on 5.6 million acres over the next 20 years. That’s 10 percent of the state’s land.

Brown is also backing a recommendation from her wildfire council to add 68 new positions at the forestry department and the state fire marshal’s office at cost of $40 million per biennium to modernize suppression efforts.

Lawmakers acknowledge they must move at breakneck speed to resolve all the requests.

“Everybody’s going to be hoppin,’” Kotek said. “I’m optimistic we can get a lot of work done.”

10 Essential Rules for Avoiding Fair Housing Trouble

This month, we highlight 10 essential rules to help you to comply with fair housing law. Housing discrimination has been outlawed for more than 50 years, but all too often communities still find themselves on the wrong side of the law and are forced to pay out thousands—and in some cases millions—in settlements or court awards, civil penalties, and attorney’s fees to get themselves out of fair housing trouble.

In this article, we’ll provide an overview of fair housing requirements and offer 10 essential rules to help you ward off fair housing problems at your community. 

WHAT DOES THE LAW SAY?

The federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and familial status. In a nutshell, the FHA prohibits communities from excluding or otherwise discriminating against prospects, applicants, and residents—as well as anyone associated with them—based on any of these protected characteristics.

The FHA also bans discriminatory statements—including advertising—that indicate a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, and familial status. And the law prohibits retaliation against anyone for exercising his or her rights under fair housing law or assisting others who exercise that right.

FOLLOW 10 ESSENTIAL RULES

TO AVOID FAIR HOUSING TROUBLE

Rule #1: Don’t Discriminate Based on Race or Color

The FHA bans discrimination based on both race and color, two separate but closely related characteristics. In general, race refers to a person’s physical appearance and color refers to a characteristic of a person’s race, so discrimination claims based on color are often coupled with claims based on race.

Be sure to give prospects the same information about availability and the terms and conditions of tenancy, such as screening criteria, rental terms, and any other relevant information. Under the FHA, it’s unlawful to deny housing based on an applicant’s race or color by providing different and false information about terms, conditions, and availability of rental properties.

Example: In September 2019, the owners and managers of two New York apartment buildings agreed to pay $272,000 to resolve allegations of racial discrimination against African American prospects in violation of federal, state, and local fair housing laws. The Fair Housing Justice Center filed the lawsuit based on the results of a two-year investigation involving white and African American testers posing as prospective renters. The complaint alleged that the white testers were repeatedly shown available units and encouraged to apply, while the African American testers were routinely told that no apartments were available for rent.

It’s also important to apply the community’s policies and procedures—including screening criteria—consistently without regard to race, color, national origin, or other protected characteristics. Whatever your policy on criminal background checks, for example, applying it only to applicants who are members of racial or ethnic minorities, but not to white applicants, is a sure way to trigger a fair housing complaint.

Example: In August 2019, the owners and managers of a Tennessee community agreed to pay $42,250 to resolve a race discrimination case alleging that they denied the rental application of an African-American applicant because of his criminal record, despite contemporaneously approving the rental applications of two white people with disqualifying felony convictions.

Tip: If your community has a policy to conduct criminal background checks, check to make sure it passes muster under HUD’s 2016 guidelines on the use of criminal records in conventional and assisted housing communities. The HUD guidance doesn’t prevent communities from screening applicants based on their criminal history, but you could trigger a fair housing complaint if the policy, without justification, has a disparate impact—or discriminatory effect—on minority applicants.

Rule #2: Don’t Discriminate Based on National Origin

The FHA prohibits discrimination based on national origin, which means the geographic area in which a person was born or from which his or her ancestors came. National origin discrimination means treating people differently because they or their family are from outside the United States, or because they have physical, cultural, or linguistic characteristics of persons from a foreign geographic area.

Example: In March 2019, the owners of a Minnesota rental home and a realty company agreed to pay $74,000 to resolve allegations that they refused to rent to a family of five adults and six minor children because they are Native American and Hispanic, and had minor children. HUD’s charge alleged that the housing providers discouraged the family from renting the six-bedroom home by offering them less favorable rental terms, including increasing the requested monthly rent by $1,000.

“Denying a family housing because of their ethnicity or familial makeup not only robs them of a place to call home, it violates the law,” Anna María Farías, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.

Tip: In September 2016, HUD issued new “Limited English Proficiency” (LEP) guidance on how fair housing law applies to claims of housing discrimination brought by people because they don’t speak, read, or write English proficiently. Although people with limited English proficiency are not a protected class under the FHA, the law bans discrimination based on national origin, which is closely linked to the ability to communicate proficiently in English.

Rule #3: Don’t Discriminate Based on Religion

The FHA prohibits discrimination based on religion, so it’s unlawful to refuse to rent to people, or to treat them differently, because of their religion. For example, it’s unlawful to show favoritism toward applicants who share your religious beliefs—or bias against—those of other religious faiths.

Example: In December 2019, a California homeowners association (HOA) and its management company agreed to pay $40,000 to resolve allegations that they refused to permit a condo owner to display a religious object, a mezuzah, on her front doorpost because it violated community rules. A mezuzah is a small object placed on the doorpost of many Jewish homes in fulfillment of religious obligations. Allegedly, someone forcibly removed the mezuzah from her doorpost.

“A rule prohibiting the display of a mezuzah effectively makes that housing unavailable for many observant Jews,” said Kevin Kish, director of California’s Department of Fair Employment & Housing. “For that reason, DFEH interprets California fair housing law to require landlords and HOAs to permit residents to display mezuzah outside of their homes.”

Tip: The FHA doesn’t define “religion,” but fair housing experts believe it’s broad enough to prohibit discrimination against individuals who aren’t affiliated with a particular religion or don’t ascribe to particular religious beliefs. Treating people differently simply because they do—or do not—attend religious services or identify with a religious faith could lead to fair housing trouble.

Rule #4: Don’t Discriminate Against Families with Children

Fair housing law prohibits discrimination because of familial status, which FHA defines to mean households with one or more children who are under 18 years of age, where the child is living with:

• A parent,
• A person who has legal custody (such as a guardian), or
• A person who has the written permission of the parent or legal custodian to care for the child.

That covers not only traditional families with children, but also same-sex couples, single mothers or fathers, grandparents, and others who have permission to have a child under 18 living with them. It also includes pregnant women and those in the process of securing legal custody of a minor child, such as a foster or adoptive parent.

There’s a limited exception to the familial status provisions that allows senior housing communities to lawfully exclude children, but it applies only if the community satisfies strict legal requirements to qualify as “housing for older persons.” Otherwise, it’s unlawful to refuse to rent to families with children under 18 by enforcing an “adults-only” policy or adopting rules, such as an age limit, that would prevent children from living there.

Overly restrictive occupancy standards can lead to discrimination claims based on familial status because they limit the housing choices of families with children under 18. In general, the law considers two people per bedroom—regardless of gender—to be a reasonable occupancy standard, but there are exceptions based on the size or configuration of the unit and other factors.

Example: In September 2019, the owners and managers of a single-family rental home in Idaho agreed to pay $15,000 to settle allegations that they discriminated against a family attempting to lease their 2,600 square foot, four-bedroom rental home because they have seven minor children. HUD’s charge alleged that when the couple met with the property manager about renting the home, he told them that the owners had set a limit of four children for the home.

“Persons attempting to provide a home for their family should not have their housing options limited because they have children,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.

The FHA’s familial status provisions also protect pregnant women from discrimination, so it’s unlawful to require residents to move out because of the birth of a child.

Example: In April 2019, the owners and operators of a student housing community in Arizona agreed to pay a $2,000 civil penalty to resolve allegations of discrimination based on sex and familial status. The Tucson Civil Rights Division brought a charge of housing discrimination against the community after viewing an example lease agreement on the apartment complex’s website. Allegedly, a portion of the lease agreement stated that if a female resident became pregnant, then she must vacate the apartment upon or prior to the birth of the child.

Rule #5: Don’t Discriminate Based on Sex

Under the FHA, it is unlawful to discriminate against applicants based on their sex. Making decisions about whether to accept or reject applicants based on their sex can lead to costly fair housing litigation, particularly when combined with allegations of discrimination based on familial status or other protected characteristics. 

Example: In June 2018, the owner of a three-unit rental community in South Dakota agreed to a $3,000 settlement to resolve allegations of discrimination based on sex and familial status. The complaint alleged that the owner refused to rent a unit to a woman and her 17-year-old daughter because she would be concerned about any woman being alone there and she had “always rented to bachelors” [U.S. v. Kelly, South Dakota, 2018].

Sexual harassment—that is, unwelcome sexual conduct—is a form of discrimination based on sex, according to HUD, which explains the two main types of sexual harassment:

Quid pro quo harassment occurs when a housing provider requires a person to submit to an unwelcome request to engage in sexual conduct as a condition of obtaining or maintaining housing or housing-related services. HUD offers these examples:

• A landlord tells an applicant he won’t rent her an apartment unless she has sex with him.
• A property manager evicts a tenant after she refuses to perform sexual acts.
• A maintenance man refuses to make repairs unless a tenant gives him nude photos of herself.

Hostile environment harassment occurs when a housing provider subjects a person to severe or pervasive unwelcome sexual conduct that interferes with the sale, rental, availability, or terms, conditions, or privileges of housing or housing-related services. HUD offers these examples:

• A landlord subjects a tenant to severe or pervasive unwelcome touching, kissing, or groping.
• A property manager makes severe or pervasive unwelcome, lewd comments about a tenant’s body.
• A maintenance man sends a tenant severe or pervasive unwelcome, sexually suggestive texts and enters her apartment without invitation or permission.

Combatting sexual harassment remains a top priority for federal enforcement officials, who continue to come down hard on owners and managers accused of sexual harassment against prospects, applicants, or residents.

Example: In August 2019, the owner and manager of rental properties in New York agreed to pay $850,000 to resolve allegations that he sexually harassed numerous female applicants and residents for nearly three decades. In its complaint, the Justice Department alleged that the landlord subjected former residents and prospects to unwanted sexual intercourse, sexual advances and comments, groping or other touching of their bodies without consent, and offers to reduce or eliminate security deposits and rent in exchange for sexual contact. The complaint also accused him of taking or threatening to take adverse action against residents when they refused or objected to his advances.

“The sexual harassment of the vulnerable female applicants and tenants in this case by their landlord is an egregious and intolerable violation of federal civil rights law,” Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband said in a statement. “The Department of Justice will continue to pursue any depraved landlords and others who prey upon vulnerable women” [U.S. v. Waterbury, New York, August 2019].

Rule #6: Don’t Discriminate Based on Disability

The FHA prohibits discrimination based on disability. Under fair housing law, disability means a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. The list of impairments broadly includes a wide range of physical and mental conditions, including visual and hearing impairments, heart disease and diabetes, HIV infection, and emotional illnesses. Examples of major life activities include seeing, hearing, walking, breathing, performing manual tasks, caring for one’s self, learning, and speaking. In sum, the law protects anyone with a physical or mental impairment that’s serious enough to substantially affect activities of central importance to daily life—even if it isn’t obvious or apparent.

Under the FHA, it’s unlawful to deny housing to people—or to treat them less favorably than others—because of a disability.

Example: In October 2019, the owner and manager of a California community agreed to pay $50,000 to resolve a fair housing claim by a resident who alleged that her lease was illegally terminated based on her disability. In her complaint, the resident claimed that the community terminated her lease because throughout her tenancy she experienced multiple medical emergencies that required the assistance of an ambulance to transport her to the hospital. Allegedly, the property manager received complaints from other residents about these emergencies.

“Housing providers cannot terminate or decline to renew a lease simply because they disfavor tenants with disabilities,” Kevin Kish, Director of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, said in a statement.

Tip: Although the disability rules protect those recovering from past drug addiction, it specifically excludes anyone who is currently using illegal drugs. The law also excludes individuals with disabilities whose tenancy would constitute a “direct threat” to the health or safety of others—or result in substantial physical damage to the property of others—unless the threat can be eliminated or significantly reduced by reasonable accommodation. Nevertheless, federal guidelines warn against a blanket policy that excludes anyone based upon fear, speculation, or stereotypes about disabilities. Instead, the law requires an individualized assessment of whether that particular applicant or resident poses such a threat based on reliable objective evidence of current conduct or a recent history of overt acts.

Rule #7: Carefully Consider Reasonable Accommodation and Modification Requests

In addition to the general rules banning disability discrimination, the FHA imposes affirmative duties on housing providers—with respect to reasonable accommodations, reasonable modifications, and accessibility design features—to ensure that individuals with disabilities have the same opportunity as everyone else to have full use of the community.

Under the FHA, it’s unlawful to refuse to make reasonable accommodations in the rules, policies, practices, or services if necessary for an individual with a disability to fully use and enjoy the housing. In general, communities are required to make an exception to the rules, when requested, if it’s both reasonable and necessary to allow an individual with a disability to fully use and enjoy the community. Common examples include a request to keep an assistance animal in a community with a no-pet policy or a request for a reserved parking spot in a community that doesn’t have assigned parking.

Example: In August 2019, a New Jersey HOA agreed to pay $30,000 to resolve allegations of discrimination against a resident with disabilities by denying her the right to have a dog as an assistance animal. According to the HUD charge, the community allegedly required the resident, who has hearing and sight disabilities, to cage her animal in common areas and use the service entrance when entering and exiting the building with the animal.

“No person with a disability should be denied the reasonable accommodation they need to make a home for themselves,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.

Example: In March 2019, the owners and managers of a San Diego apartment complex agreed to pay $17,000 to resolve allegations that they denied the request of a resident with disabilities for a designated parking space close to the building. The HUD complaint was filed by the resident, who uses a wheelchair, alleging that his request for an assigned parking space in the development’s garage had been denied. He said that the community later allowed him to park in non-assigned accessible spaces in the garage, but it wouldn’t give him the key necessary to enter the garage and to use the elevator. As a result, the resident said that whenever he wanted to enter the garage, he had to wait for another resident to open the gate, then follow that person in so he could use the elevator.

“To a person with mobility limitations, a designated parking space can mean the difference between merely living in a development and truly being able to call a place home,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.

Tip: The FHA also makes it unlawful to refuse to allow reasonable modifications to the unit or common use areas, at the applicant or resident’s expense, if necessary for the individual with a disability to fully use the housing. Reasonable modifications are structural changes to interiors and exteriors of units and to common and public use areas, such as lobbies, main entrances, and parking lots. Examples include widening doorways to make rooms more accessible for people in wheelchairs, installing grab bars in bathrooms, lowering kitchen cabinets to a height suitable for persons in wheelchairs, adding a ramp to make a primary entrance accessible, or altering a walkway to provide access to a public or common use area.

Rule #8: Abide by Rules Banning Discriminatory Advertising

Under the FHA, it’s unlawful to advertise or make any statement that indicates a limitation or preference based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, or familial status. Liability for making discriminatory statements doesn’t require proof of discriminatory intent. Instead, the focus is on whether the statement would suggest a preference to an “ordinary reader or listener.” The rules apply not only to verbal and written statements, but also to all advertising media, including newspapers, magazines, television, radio, and the Internet.

Example: In April 2019, the owner of a Maine rental property and its rental agent agreed to pay $18,000 to settle allegations that they denied housing to families with children. A fair housing advocacy group filed the HUD complaint alleging that the community posted discriminatory advertisements indicating that children were not allowed and refused to negotiate with fair housing testers posing as families with children.

“It’s hard enough for families to find places to live that meet their needs without being denied suitable housing because they have children,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement. “HUD is committed to working to ensure that housing providers comply with their Fair Housing Act obligation to treat all applicants the same, including families with children.”

Rule #9: Watch Out for Potential Retaliation Claims

Under the FHA, it’s unlawful to “coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with” anyone who has exercised a fair housing right—or anyone who assisted others in exercising that right. Because discrimination and retaliation are separate violations under fair housing law, you could face liability for retaliation if you take adverse action against a resident solely because he filed a discrimination complaint against you—even if the discrimination claim is ultimately dismissed.

Watch out for potential retaliation claims when dealing with requests for reasonable accommodations or modifications by or on behalf of individuals with disabilities. The law protects people from retaliation for exercising their right to make disability-related requests.

Example: In March 2019, the owner and manager of a California rental community agreed to pay $6,000 to settle allegations that they refused to remediate mold at the property as a reasonable accommodation for a couple with disabilities and retaliated against them for asking that the mold be removed. In their HUD complaint, the couple alleged that the owners retaliated against them for making the reasonable accommodation request by increasing their rent and issuing a notice terminating their lease.

“Reasonable accommodation requests aren’t requests for special treatment. They are what many individuals with disabilities need to live in the place they call home,” Anna María Farías, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.

Rule #10: Abide by Applicable State and Local Fair Housing Laws

To avoid fair housing trouble, it’s important to comply with not only the FHA, but also applicable state or local fair housing laws. Often, these state and local laws extend fair housing protections beyond federal requirements to ban discrimination based on:

Marital status: Nearly half the states prohibit housing discrimination based on marital status, which generally means being single, married, divorced, or widowed.

Age: Many state and local laws ban discrimination based on age, though there are significant differences in how the laws apply because of the way they define age.

Sexual orientation and gender identity: Many state and local fair housing laws ban discrimination based on sexual orientation; of those, many, but not all, also cover gender identity or transgender status.

Source of income: Many state and local fair housing laws also cover lawful source of income to ban discrimination against people based on where they get their financial support. The specifics of the laws vary, but they generally apply to wages, retirement benefits, child support, and public assistance. Of those, many, but not all, also cover housing subsidies, most notably Section 8 housing vouchers.

Military status: Some state and local laws offer some form of fair housing protection for military status. The laws generally prohibit discrimination against active duty members and veterans of the armed forces, reserves, or state National Guard.

Other protected classes: Some state and local laws ban discrimination based other factors, such as status as survivor of domestic violence, genetic information, HIV status, lawful occupation, political beliefs or affiliation, student status, alienage or citizenship, personal appearance, or arbitrary personal characteristics.

City of Portland Rental Housing Hoops

 

In 2018, the City of Portland enacted a Residential Rental Registration Program, Ordinance No. 189086. Its goal was to create an inventory of rental housing in a single location. Manufactured housing communities paid little attention, since it applied to “rental housing units”. At the time there were no specifics about funding the Program.

 

In 2019, the City implemented a $60 annual fee per rental unit to fund the Program. In December I contacted the Portland Housing Bureau to see if somehow it would be interpreted as applying to manufactured housing communities inside the City of Portland.[1]

 

On February 4, 2020 I had a conversation with two representatives of the Bureau. The agreed that the $60 fee would not apply to manufactured housing spaces in the City of Portland. However, they did say that it would apply to community owned homes – which does make sense, since they are also subject to the non-manufactured housing section of the Oregon Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, ORS Chapter 90.

 

Although most park owners are aware of the hoops, following are links to the applicable requirements when located within the City of Portland:

 

• Under the Ordinance, park owners will have to register with the City. See: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/59484

 

• And since the City views housing rental as a business, a business license will be required. See: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/59484

 

• Also, the Portland Business Tax applies. See: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/29320See the following link for exeptions: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/59568

 

• And with the new $60 fee, landlords will have to complete Form R (here), to include with their business tax filing.

 

The 2019 tax is due on April 15, 2020for calendar year taxpayers. For further information, owners should check with their own legal counsel and/or CPA.

 

 

 

[1]I stated: “My reading of the ordinance, which was passed almost 1 ½ years ago, is that it does not apply to rental spaces in mobile home parks. Section 7.02.890 A provides: “For purposes of this section, except where defined by administrative rule in accordance with Section 7.02.210, "residentialrentalunit"meansanyresidentialpropertyrented or offered for rent for a period of more than 30 consecutive days. If a property contains more than one residential living quarter, the term residential rental unit refers to each separate livingquarter.”  (Italics mine.) Mobile home spaces do not contain “more than one residential living quarter” so it seems fairly clear that the drafters did not intend (or believe) that mobile home park spaces constituted ‘residential living units.’”

Answer:  It’s easy to get confused. There is a lot to remember.  Generally all of the answers are contained in ORS 90.630[Termination by landlord; causes; notice; cure; repeated nonpayment of rent].[1]Here is a short summary:

 

· The landlord may terminate a rental agreement that is a month-to-month or fixed term tenancy in a manufactured housing community by giving not less than 30 days’ noticein writing before the date designated in the notice for termination if the tenant:

• Violates a law or ordinance related to the tenant’s conduct as a tenant, including but not limited to a material noncompliance with ORS 90.740[Tenant Obligations];
• Violates a rule or rental agreement provision;
• Is determined to be a predatory sex offender under ORS 181.585 to 181.587; or
• Fails to pay a (i) a late charge pursuant to ORS 90.260; (ii) A fee pursuant to ORS 90.302; or (iii) a utility or service charge pursuant to ORS 90.534or 90.536.

· The tenant may avoid termination of the tenancy by correcting the violation within the 30-day period specified in notice of violation. However, if substantially the same act or omission recurs within six months after the date of the notice, the landlord may terminate the tenancy upon at least 20 days’ written noticespecifying the violation and the date of termination of the tenancy.  In such cases, the tenant does nothave a right to correct the violation – and the notice must so state. 

· Oregon’s “three strikes” law only applies to cases in which the tenant is issued three 72-hour [or 144-hour] notices within a 12-month period.  [Caveat: All three notices must have been validly prepared and delivered or served. – PCQ]The “three strikes” law is found at ORS 90.630(8)-(10).As noted above, multiple violations of the same or similar rule within six months can result in the landlord’s issuance of a non-curable 20-day notice to the tenant.