Legislative Update From Preti Strategies
The 2022 spring season on Beacon Hill is consumed primarily with consideration of the state budget. Throughout the month of March, the Joint Committee on Ways and Means held hearings on the entire budget, including housing initiatives. In the second week of April, the Committee will release its budget and then debate it the last week of the month. SPOA will primarily play defense against so-called “Outside Sections,” which are policy-rider amendments tacked on to the budget bill. There are often housing and tenant related amendments filed, mostly ones we oppose, which will be our focus in late April. In May, the process will repeat itself in the Senate.
Below are summaries of the bills we have been watching over the course of the session. These summaries include updated information, as well as information described in the previous newsletter.
Eviction Sealing
A bill that SPOA has watched and testified against appears to be gaining traction. House bill 4505 would allow for the sealing of eviction records without requiring notice to landlords and with very little chance for courts to overrule the sealing of the record once a petition has been made to seal it. The bill would apply to cases where tenants broke the terms of their lease (including in cases where they broke the law) and in so-called “no-fault” evictions as well. Evicted tenants need only wait three years after the eviction and then petition the court. Once sealed, records would be shielded from credit reporting and other information-gathering services. Despite SPOA and many others’ negative testimony, the bill received a favorable report from committee and is now before the House Committee on Bills in the Third Reading; a last stop before it could be debated on the floor of the House.
As stated in testimony previously delivered by SPOA, small property owners are small business owners who need to know the business risks that they are taking when they consider potential tenants. A tenant with a history of evictions poses a financial risk, not only to the property owner, but to the other tenants in a building who could face rent increases themselves to cover the costs of a delinquent tenant. It is imperative to avoid placing blindfolds on property owners as they enter into rental agreements. This would have an unjust and negative effect on those who consider renting their properties at a time when we need to encourage more property owners to offer affordable rental housing options, rather than discouraging them from doing so, as would happen with the passage of these bills.
COVID Eviction Continuances
On March 24, the Senate rejected an amendment to a supplemental budget filed by Senator Jehlen of Somerville that would have taken away judicial discretion in cases of COVID-related continuances in eviction cases and made it mandatory for the courts to continue a case if the defendant had an active application for rental assistance. This change to COVID-era tenant provisions, which have already been extended twice, would have placed even more burden on landlords who already are tasked with negotiating a difficult eviction process.
Rent Escrow
Per the previous newsletter, SPOA supported House bill 1784, “An Act to Promote Housing Stability,” as it creates a level playing field in cases where Massachusetts law allows for the withholding of rent by a tenant alleging breach of duty or contract by a property owner. In these circumstances, rent payments are too often spent on other items by the time a final verdict is reached in each case. However, by virtue of setting the funds aside, a rent escrow requirement would guarantee that the funds will be available to whichever party the court decides should receive them based on the final outcome of each case. Moreover, a rent escrow requirement would guard against the withholding of rent payments based upon artificial pretenses or excuses that are inappropriate. This is therefore a simple fix to make the system work as intended. SPOA also supported similar House bills, including 1533, 1546, and 1677.
Free Attorneys for All Tenants
Finally, SPOA has opposed House bill 1911, which would establish a universal — and unreciprocated — right to legal counsel for all tenants into state law at the expense of the tax payer. We think that this bill arises from a false narrative that most, if not all, eviction cases are brought by wealthy property owners against wronged tenants, who are financially vulnerable. In reality, many small property owners face the same financial challenges as their tenants and have been forced to engage in the eviction process as a last resort to recover lost income. Per SPOA’s testimony, if the Committee decides to provide free legal counsel to tenants, then it must consider House bill 1782, which would give the same rights to property owners. Providing universal right to counsel for both tenants and property owners is the only way to ensure a level playing field for both small property owners and tenants alike.
By Jim Eisenberg
