People in the real estate community, owners, lenders, landlords, are concerned that SB1410, and SB1436, in an effort to do something useful, important, and helpful, to the housing challenges presented by Covid19, may seriously damage them at the same time. Who will want to be a residential landlord or lender when their legal rights have been removed from the equation? To own residential income property without the promise of enforceability of rental agreements and receipt of promised income? Who will want to lease their home, house, apartment, to a tenant knowing that tenant may legally remain in the home without payment of rent for some undetermined period of time? Even if tenants do pay their rent, what if an owner wants to take possession for their own use, or to sell to a buyer who wants to occupy the home? There is no provision for that. The landlord-owner forced into acceptance of a tax credit program, in lieu of rent payments, is now what owners invested in. They didn't sign up for that when they purchased the property as an investment, expecting income the tenant agreed to pay. Additionally, SB 1436 attempts to go further and allow some residential owners not to pay their mortgage payment, forbearance or some kind. However, this still involves owner-landlords involuntarily taking on additional debt. These bills take away a significant portion of the private property rights of the landlords of residential rental properties, and lenders, Nevertheless, even with a loan forbearance agreement, owner-landlords will still have to pay for maintenance, property taxes and other elements of responsibility taken on when the landlord purchased the rental property. These landlords made those purchases as investments, based on the income and laws in place at the time of their purchase. If we are going to change our landlord-tenant laws to completely revoke a landlords' right to terminate the tenancy, regain possession of their property, to sell or lease to a paying tenant, then there is much more work to be done. You can't stop there.

SB1410 provides a rent relief program to those who need housing now and gives tenants an amortized risk mitigation arrangement. Unfortunately, it also forces owner-landlords to abide by these new (retroactive) laws taking away the landlord's right to evict a tenant "for any reason". It would be much easier just to provide State issued vouchers to Tenants in need. Yes its taxation of a different type, yes this will add to the State's burden, but it will stop the damage at the tenant level, otherwise it goes up the chain to landlords, lenders, the lender's shareholders, and regulators. Many landlords are small investors, senior citizens and retirees rely on their rental income for their own survival and that of their families. Why is this concern set aside so inconsiderately? 

If nothing else, please tell someone that these bills should not apply to situations NOT related to failure to pay. For example: If a lease has expired and the tenants have paid on time, as agreed, (or not) if the owner-landlord of the property wishes to sell it, or move in as the landlord’s primary residence, the landlord should be permitted to do so. My reading of SB1410 and SB1436 would not allow the landlord to enforce vacating the property upon sale, thwarting the landlord’s ability to sell their property to a buyer who wishes to occupy the property. There are many other possible violations of a rental agreement besides payment of rent that SB1410 and SB 1436 ignore completely, with the exception of “danger to the public”. With these bills as law, a tenant can violate any aspect of the rental agreement without accountability, consequence or penalty. These bills create new tenant-landlord law, amending laws that have been in place for decades. They literally outlaws ALL unlawful detainer actions with one execution, danger to the public. Please consider modifying the langue to permit unlawful detainer actions in cases unrelated to payment of rent. Excerpt from SB1410: "An owner of real property shall not, during a state of emergency, and (TBD) days thereafter, demand payment of unpaid rent, serve a notice terminating tenancy, file a complaint for unlawful detainer, take action to proceed with a pending unlawful detainer action, commence or prosecute any other action to recover possession of the real property, request that a sheriff execute a writ of possession for the property, or otherwise attempt to evict a tenant in any manner unless the following applies: The notice and any complaint based on that notice allege that the action is necessary to protect public health and safety.”

Thank you for your serious consideration of these concerns.

Tony Wood, SIOR, KW Commercial