WAM- Sacramento Update, July 2004

Sacramento Update, July 2004
By Carl Lambert, Esq.

STOPPING BAD LEGISLATION

Each year, California Apartment Association members converge on Sacramento. This year, over 750 members from CAA met with legislators to express our opposition with bills that would be harmful to apartment owners. The owners also lobbied for several bills sponsored by CAA. The most notable bills are as follows:

AB 2582, (D-Lieber) would have required “Written Notice” by property owners to prospective tenants concerning the presence of hazardous substances that the landlord had actual knowledge that the hazardous materials were in, on or beneath the dwelling unit. Environmental hazards included, but were not limited to, asbestos, formaldehyde, radon gas, lead base paint, mold, fuel tanks or contained soil or water.

This bill would of also give attorneys a right to sue a property owner and collect penalties if the owner allegedly failed to provide the type of notice that the attorney claimed were required by the bill. This bill would have provided for a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000 for each separate violation. Also, a tenant who entered into a rental agreement without written notice could void the rental agreement.

This bill died on the assembly floor on May 27th, 2004 after Lieber was informed by her colleagues that the bill lacked the votes necessary to move it out of the assembly.

AB 2583 (D-Lieber) was a bill that would have prohibited a landlord from demanding private or personal information from existing tenants as condition of continuing tenancy. Apparently a landlord attorney in Los Angeles came up with “The Landlord Solution” which was to request extremely private information from the tenants, including photographs of all residents, etc. in an attempt to usher tenants out of rent controlled apartments. While we certainly cannot condone overreaching information requests on existing tenants, it is important that we be able to request necessary information such as names of any additional tenants, make, model and license number of vehicles, and emergency contact information. This bill failed passage after three unsuccessful attempts to gain enough votes to move off the floor. Thus, landlords still have the right to request reasonable information from existing tenants.

SB 1145 (D-Burton) was an attempt to get around scheduled sunset clauses in previous legislation. Currently owners must give long term tenants a 60-day notice prior to terminating tenancy. Burton wanted to remove the sunset date thereby allowing the law to remain in place indefinitely. However, after much opposition, Senator Burton has amended his bill to remove the 60-day notice termination notice provisions from the bill. This means that the 60-day requirement is set to expire January 2006. The bill currently removes the January 1, 2006 sunset provision which requires an owner to provide tenants a 60-day notice when an owner increases the rent more then of 10%.

SB 1722 has moved off the Senate floor and is going to the Assembly Environmental Committee. This is a California Apartment Association sponsored bill that provides that a class action settlement based on Prop 65 can be used by owners as protection against bounty hunter attorneys suing owners for a Prop 65 sign violation. Basically, res judicata protects an owner from being sued for second time on the same set of facts. By participating in a class action settlement agreement, you can provide additional insulation from these bounty hunters.