On March 5th the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD and the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a joint statement on the subject of Reasonable Modifications Under the Fair Housing Act.   The HUD and DOJ are jointly responsible for enforcing the Federal Fair Housing Act that prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability. One type of disability discrimination prohibited by the Act is a refusal to permit, at the expense of the person with a disability, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises.

HUD and DOJ frequently respond to complaints alleging that housing providers have violated the Act by refusing reasonable modifications to persons with disabilities. This Joint Statement provides technical assistance regarding the rights and obligations of persons with disabilities and housing providers under the Act relating to reasonable modifications.

This newly released joint statement sets out specific questions and answers with illustrations of specific scenarios and it is recommended that all of our multi-family housing providers take time to read and review this HUD/DOJ Statement on Reasonable Modifications.

On March 17th SB 08-206 Co-sponsored by Shaffer/Penry was introduced. This bill creates a cash fund for a state justice center and a new Colorado state museum by increasing civil court fees. This bill strikes the previous increases made in last year's HB-1054 and creates even higher increases in court filing fees. This NEW INCREASE in court fees will have a direct impact on the fees charged to Multi-Family Housing Industry providers. It has been assigned to the Judiciary, Finance and Appropriation Committees.

This law, when passed, will increase County Court filing fees to a staggering $110.00 per case, plus the forced electronic filing of fee of $6.85, or a total of $116.85. Filing fees are currently, $60.00, plus $6.85 for the electronic filing fee, or a total of $66.85. Right now the total is $66.85. This would raise the total filing fee to $116.85. This is an increase of 75%, This is, of course, on top of the 45% increase last year (last year fees, not including the electronic filing fee, went from $46 to $60). NOW when the forced electronic filing fee of $6.85 is included, in less than a year-and-a-half, fees will have increased from $46 to $116.85 (including the forced electronic filing fee), or to put it bluntly the fees will have increased a staggering 154% in a little over a year.

You can download the Bill by clicking on the download button below. We have prepared contact information for HTS clients to access so that they can express their concerns to the members of the legislature. Click here to obtain contact information on the legislators who are sponsoring this Bill.

HB-1356 Concerning Landlord and Tenant Relations. Representative Michael Merrifield (D-Manitou Springs) introduced the Landlord Tenant Bill on Friday, March 7th. The Bill includes a warranty of habitability and several penalties if a property owner does not comply with the warranty. The bill does not require a tenant to provide written notice if a warranty of habitability claim is asserted. Because of this, industry groups oppose the Bill until it is amended to require written notice. Members of the industry believe that written notice is essential because it is the only reasonable method for tenants to use to communicate to property owners about habitability issues. Property owners have a right to know about serious allegations and should have the opportunity to address these allegations before facing significant financial penalties. Senior Partner Mark Tschetter has worked for the past nine months with industry committees and members of the legislature to reach reasonable compromises on the crafting of this legislation. Mark will continue to actively work on seeking appropriate amendments that will represent the best interests of the multi-family housing industry. To keep informed of the status and progress of this legislation, attend the HTS Monthly Client Luncheons and look for updates in the Landlord News.

The multi-family housing community dodged a legislative bullet this year when the onerous proposed legislation championed by Representative Michael Merrifield failed to be introduced. But this is not a victory in the legislative war being waged on the Apartment Community, it is more like a win in a skirmish of the ongoing hostilities.

Anti-industry legislation has been introduced in five of the last six legislative sessions, and we can anticipate that Representative Merrifield and his supporters will return in the next session to take up the fray once more. National and State legislatures and elections can and do have a major impact on the multi-family housing industry, as we’ve found over and over again. And, they will continue to do so. Therefore, it is imperative that members of the multi-family housing industry take both an interest and a proactive stance in supporting their positions on any proposed legislation and be actively involved in helping to elect pro-industry candidates.

It is a widely known fact that, “Those who participate are likely to have more political influence than those who don’t.”

BELOW IS A LEGISLATIVE REPORT SUMMARIZING THE AAMD AND CAA OVERVIEW OF THE LEGISLATION AND LOBBYING ON THIS ISSUE

Newsletter of the Colorado Apartment Association
- May 2007
- No Changes to Landlord Tenant Laws for 2007

On May 9, the 66th Session of the Colorado General Assembly ends. Over 600 bills have been introduced in the Colorado House and Senate this legislative session. But more important for the apartment industry than what was introduced, is what was not introduced.

The landlord tenant bill sponsored by Representative Michael Merrifield (D-Manitou Springs) has been tabled for this year. The bill contained sweeping and complex provisions that would have fundamentally altered Colorado’s landlord tenant laws. It included concepts such as warranty of habitability, and increased court jurisdiction over landlord tenant disputes. It contained a host of restrictions and imposed many new obligations on landlords. It also enumerated an expansive list of tenant remedies.

For example, the bill gave tenants the “self-help” right to repair or contract someone to repair minor defects in a rental unit. Another remedy allowed tenants to remain in possession of a rental unit even when rent is unpaid. Another example illustrates the additional burdens placed on rental housing. Under current Colorado law, a seller of residential property (including apartments) is required to disclose whether a property was previously used as a methamphetamine laboratory. However, if seller meets strict remediation standards set by the state, seller is not required to disclose the existence of a meth lab. The underlying rationale for the law is that remediation satisfies any ongoing health and safety concerns associated with the property, so there is no need to disclose. The proposed landlord tenant bill expanded Colorado’s meth lab disclosure requirement. Under the bill, landlords would have to provide a written disclosure to every tenant stating whether a meth lab ever existed in an apartment complex or rental property. This duty to disclose for landlords is much higher than the standard set forth under existing Colorado law for property sellers. Under the proposed bill, landlords would never be able to remove the stigma of having a meth lab on a rental property. This is because landlords would have an absolute duty to disclose. Even if they complied with state remediation standards and undertook expensive meth lab clean-up costs, they would still have to disclose the existence of a meth lab. The landlord tenant bill allowed tenants to sue landlords for the greater of three months’ rent or three times actual damages, attorney fees, and costs if a landlord failed to disclose a methamphetamine laboratory on a rental premises (even if remediation occurred).

In addition to these new requirements, the latest bill incorporated issues seen in prior years – cap on late fees, mandatory grace period for late payment of rent, additional termination notice for residents, and a shorter time period to return security deposits. On each of these points, the bill looked to significantly strengthen the residents’ position in the tenancy relationship. The landlord tenant bill would have substantially increased the cost of doing business in Colorado. The new laws would have created barriers for the rental housing market, choked future growth, and stifled expansion of Colorado’s housing market. A landlord tenant bill has been proposed during five of the last six legislative sessions, and this year looked no different.

In mid-February, Rep. Merrifield met with stakeholders to discuss the landlord tenant bill he intended to sponsor this session. His ambitious 37-page bill completely overhauled Colorado’s landlord tenant laws. After the February meeting with Rep. Merrifield, the stakeholders met several times to discuss the bill. During this process, a committed group of volunteers from the Colorado Apartment Association (CAA) met with tenant rights’ groups who strongly supported the landlord tenant bill. The CAA representatives came from diverse backgrounds and represented the entire spectrum of industry viewpoints. These stake-holder meetings were productive because the groups came to agreement on certain key concepts, such as warranty of habitability. But representatives could not agree on specific details to implement these concepts.

After several weeks, the groups agreed the scope and size of the proposed landlord tenant bill was too big, and also agreed to postpone introduction
of the bill till next year in order to craft a landlord tenant bill that has meaningful input from all stakeholders. It is clear the groups are committed to continue an ongoing dialogue over the coming months.

The negotiations this year on the landlord tenant bill show that advocacy can take many different forms. In prior years, the Colorado Apartment Association used intense lobbying efforts to prevent bills from being enacted into Colorado law. This year, the CAA focused on building consensus among stakeholders to achieve its objectives. In the coming months, the CAA is optimistic in facing the new challenge of working with a diverse group of organizations in drafting a landlord tenant bill that fairly represents the interests of the apartment industry.

A Landlord/Tenant planned for introduction in the Colorado Legislature by Representative Michael Merrifield of Colorado Springs has been deferred for introduction until next year. This bill is much more expansive than prior versions. Among the provisions, the bill includes a grace period in which an owner cannot collect fees for late payment of rent, as well as a restrictive cap on late fees an owner can charge. In addition, security deposits must be returned to the tenant within 30 days, and owners must comply with a number of new disclosure and notice requirements. It requires significantly more time and effort to evict a tenant under the new bill and owners must adhere to higher maintenance standards (warranty of habitability). Tenants will have the right to withhold rent or terminate a lease from owners who fail to comply with the new law.

The Firm will continue to be actively involved in following and lobbying this bill when it is introduced. Ultimately, the multi-family housing industry will need to rally the support and action of everyone in order to overcome this new Landlord Tenant bill.