Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 28, 1975)
Landlord-tenant law still alive in Salem By MIKE DOLAN Of the Emerald SALEM—Fred has been evicted. His landlord, as required by law, gives him 30 days to find another place to live. Fred, mad at his landlord, decides to use that time to tear the house up. What does it matter to him if he chops holes in the wall—it isn’t his house. Pam has been evicted, too. She was a good tenant, keeping her apartment clean and turning her stereo down at night. She always paid her rent on time. Her landlord evicted her when he read about her arrest in the paper. It was a mistake. Pam only only looked like the person who committed the crime so the charges were drop ped a week later. The eviction notice was not dropped. The stories of Fred and Pam are true—only their names have been changed. Their cases are typical of the evic tion problems that worry the lob byists on both sides of the landlord bills now in the Legislature—Fred’s case, be cause the damage he caused may force the landlord to raise his rents. Pam’s case, because she lost her home through no fault of her own. Most of the important landlord tenant legislation is contained in three bills. SB-310—and the nearly identical HB-2345—restrict landlords from evicting renters except for very specific reasons. HB-2061, the major landlord tenant bill of the session, is a compromise measure covering a range of renting problems with clauses to satisfy both landlords and tenants. It gives tenants the right to “re pair and deduct.’’ If a landlord has negligently allowed some essen tial service (like heating) to de teriorate, the renter can repair it and deduct the cost from his or her rent. The renter must notify the land lord in writing and repairs cannot exceed $200 or the price of one month’s rent, whichever is grea ter. HB-2061 also gives landlords the right to “nail and mail.” This catchy little phrase means a land lord can forgo the usual 30-day eviction notice for dangerous ren ters and serve a one-day notice by posting it on the door and mailing it to the renter. The bill, hammered out in fre quent sessions of the House State and Federal Affairs Committee, passed the House Monday and will probably pass the Senate be cause it embodies compromises suggested by the Oregon Real tors Association, the Oregon Homebuilders Association, the Eugene-Springfield Tenants Union, Multnomah County Legal Aid and Portland Student Ser vices (a PSU-related student housing organization). Besides the concessions for each side of the controversy, HB-2061 establishes a more clear-cut procedure in the landlord-tenant relationship. It re quires landlords to give renters a written copy of the rent agreement and a 30-day written notice of any rent increases. Trie two other bills, SB-310 and HB-2345, take away landlord’s ability to evict a renter for just any reason. They cle|rty spell out the justifiable reasons for eviction: failure to pay rent, disorderly con duct, damaging the unit or injury ing other renters, violating the rent agreement and a few other more technical reasons. A landlord can also evict a ten MOTHER’S DAY IS MAY 11 Make your appointment now for a color portrait by Sogge. litc Sow* on campus 1214 Kincaid Street Eugene, Oregon — 344-3432 ant if he or she wants to move into the rental unit or if he or she has to vacate the place in order to sell it. And the bills strengthen a section of the 1973 law prohibiting re taliatory evictions of renters who join tenant unions. Most of the lobbyists have con centrated on SB-310, now before the Senate Consumer and Busi ness Affairs Committee. While the tenants consider the measure to be an equitable and worthwhile insurance of civil rights, the land lords think the just-cause-for eviction bill might lead to the de mise of their industry. “The restrictions embodied in SB-310 are simply not palatable to landlords,” says Eric Meurer of the Oregon Homebuilders As sociation. He sees the bill as part of a trend that is discouraging people from investing in the rental business. Although he supports HB-2061, Meurer is wary of legislation re moving some of the latitude—and therefore the “fun ”—from the rent ing business. He feels restrictions on landlords may force them out of business and force government in. _ Richard Forester, deputy direc tor of Multnomah County Legal Aid, disagrees. “The whole thrust of 310 is freedom of speech,” he says. By diminishing the un spoken threat of eviction, he exp lains, a tenant can talk about sub-standard conditions. People talking to each other leads people trusting each other. And trust, he says, leads to longer and more stable rentals, an advantage to both renters and landlords. Forester and Meurer reach such different conclusions be cause they each take a different side of the basic question involved in landlord-tenant laws. Should renting be covered under property law or contract law? What is most important, the property invested or the services rendered? Meurer says property is the basis of the transaction because the landlord has so much invested and the renter has so little. And, he says, the renter can call it quits at anytime and move on, the land lord can't. Meanwmie, in committee SALEM — Some of Eugene’s tenants have been busy in the Legislature. Members of the Eugene-Springfield Tenants Union have introduced two bills. Both of the bills, SB-662 and SB-768, are before the Senate Con sumer and Business Affairs Committee. The committee will be taking action on all of its landlord-tenant bills at the same time and has put off consideration of the two bills for a while. SB-662 puts some restrictions on rental referral agencies. It pro hibits them from charging renters before they provide a service. SB-768 prohibits a landlord from making a tenant pay any fees besides rent. It also makes it easier for renters to get their secunty deposits back from landlords. And it requires landlords to pay interest on security deposits held longer than six months. The bills join about 12 others now languishing in the Legislature. They range from a bill placing tenants on a public housing authority to a bill against discriminating against renting parents. Forester says people do not pay for land, they pay for services, so both a renter who gives money and a landlord who gives a dwel ling should be on equal legal foot ing. Although they disagree on what should be the basis of the rela tionship both Meurer and Forester agree that the trend is moving away from property rights and to ward the contract rights idea. The trend may not be as notice able this session as last session. In 1973, the Legislature passed the Landlord-Tenant Act, the foundation of Oregon rental laws. This session won’t see anything as sweeping. Cindy Parker, lob byist for Portland Student Ser vices, has been following landlord-tenant bills all session. Although she says her student housing organization fulfills the functions of both a landlord and a tenant, she has been working primarily on the side of tenants. Her expectations have consid erably lessened since January. She came to Salem hoping to get just-cause-for-eviction legislation enacted (basically SB-310), now she says she will be satisfied with the compromises in HB-2061. “If 310 gets through it will be a miracle,” she says. Although she has struck up a friendly relation ship with the landlord lobbyists she has opposed for the past three months ("We always say ‘hello’ in the halls.”), Parker feels they exercise too much influence in the Legislature. The housing industry, she says, is closely connected to Oregon’s number one business, cutting down trees. And as for their lobby ing ability, she says, "Money is power.” THE DAY OF THE LOCUST IS COMING! 51 DUf or irmr