Search

Later this week, the Oregon House Committee on Housing and Homelessness will introduce an amendment to HB3054 (Rent Control & Vacancy Control). The committee is expected to adopt this amendment later in April. MHCO has been negotiating with Rep Marsh (Committee Chair), but no agreement was reached as negotiations ended several weeks ago. 

The amendment to be introduced removes ‘vacancy control’ and increases the rent cap to 6% (the original bill limited rent increases to CPI). The new amendment also exempts communities/marinas with 30 or less units. MHCO is waiting to review the actual amendment and will provide further analysis once the actual language is available.

In the meantime, here is a summary of the amendment:

1. Applies only to the tenancies of the homeowners of manufactured dwellings and floating homes who rent a space in parks and marinas, known collectively as facilities.

2.      Lowers the maximum allowed annual rent increase to 6 percent from the current level of 7 percent plus CPI capped at 10 percent (SB 608 (2019)). 

a.       Parks and marinas with 30 or fewer spaces are exempted from this lower maximum and continue to be covered by the current level.

3.      Exception: Landlords of facilities with more than 30 spaces may increase the rent once every five years to 12 percent to address a significant infrastructure repair, upgrade, or addition cost, with the approval of the homeowners of at least 51 percent of the occupied spaces. 

a.       The bill describes requirements for this written vote including a written proposal with estimated costs and time frame, and with a recapture penalty if the improvement is not completed.

4.      Clarifies that a landlord may not require a selling tenant or a purchasing tenant to make aesthetic or cosmetic improvements to the home as a condition of approving a sale.  

a.       Note that an example of an aesthetic improvement would be a change in the paint color of the exterior of the home; peeling or faded paint is already defined as “deterioration,” and the law allows a landlord to require correction during a tenancy or as a condition of a sale. 

5.      Prohibits landlords from requiring selling tenants or purchasers to consent to or obtain an inspection of the interior of the home. 

a.       Note that current law requires a tenant to keep the home “safe from the hazards of fire,” which would include the exterior and the interior of the home. 

MHCO remains opposed to the amendment.

This is a multiple part series on a private owner of a Manufactured Home Community willingly attempting to sell that Community to an Association of tenants within that Community. Riverbend MHP is a 39 space community located within the city limits of Clatskanie, OR. The motivation of the seller was discussed in the first part. In this second part, the owner meets with the Deputy Director and the Real Estate and Cooperative Development Manager for CASA of Oregon. The framing, presentation and negotiation of the Agreement to Purchase" is discussed.

In this second part

When the prospective resident returns a complete and accurate written rental application, you should provide the applicant the following:

• A copy of the rules and regulations (if not provided earlier)
• Rental agreement form
• Statement of policy (if not provided earlier)
• Rent history of the space
• Criminal check authorization
• Resident applicant screening fee should be acquired prior to accepting the individual as a resident. "Application Screening Fee and Receipt" form is to be signed by a manager when applicant's fees are accepted.
• The landlord must give written notice of what the tenant screening or consumer credit report entails, the landlord's charge for the screening, and the applicant's right to dispute the screening service or credit reporting agency's information if the application is denied based on the credit report.
• Minimum Criteria Standards

At this point the above documents are to be provided to the prospective applicant. However, only the application, the criminal check authorization and the applicant screening fee notice and receipt should be signed by the tenant. The other documents are not to be signed until the application and background checks are completed and the applicant is approved. The additional documents that are provided when the applicant returns the rental application are provided to the prospective tenant for their information so that they may be aware of the facts and make the housing choice that is right for them. 

MHCO Note:  Although the limit for 2025 will be set at 10%, housing providers should be aware that legislative action in 2025 could quickly change the limit formula downward.

|Published: Sep. 23, 2024, 'Oregonian'.

Oregon landlords are allowed to raise rents by up to 10% in many residences next year, state officials said on Monday.

Oregon passed its first-in-the-nation rent control law in 2019 in what supporters cast as a way to stabilize unregulated price increases. Lawmakers modified the law in 2023 to set a ceiling at the lesser of 7% plus inflation or 10%.

Since Oregon implemented rent control in 2019, the cap has equaled about 9% to 10%, according to the Department of Administrative Services, except in 2023 when it reached 14.6% for half the year amid blistering inflation.

That was a turning point for the statewide law, as renters’ rights groups expressed dismay and claimed the high allowable increases would cause more evictions.

Landlord representatives have said that property taxes and housing demand are generally more influential on their pricing decisions that the rent cap formula, and that most rent increases come in below the statutory maximum.

The rate reset to 10% in mid-2023 after lawmakers voted to install an upper limit. It held at 10% in 2024 and will be the same in 2025, as calculated by the stats’s Office of Economic Analysis, which by law must issue a rate by Sept. 30 annually.

The law doesn’t affect rentals built in the past 15 years. It only regulates older houses and apartments

Answer.  I’m no expert on the Oregon fire code requirements or its exceptions.  I did some brief online research (the kind that you don’t want to rely on, but use as a starting point for further information). Here are my thoughts:

1. I have no idea what kind of “solution” the assistant fire marshal has in mind, but find it hard to believe the issue hasn’t arisen before. I’m inclined to believe there are work-arounds, if you push a little. This is an issue of public safety, why don’t the city and county install another fire hydrant? I assume cost – but is that a reason for your park to stop accepting homes? Your park presumably went through some form of land use approvals initially, and access to fire hydrants for the approved spaces was already considered.

2. Grandfathering is a possibility, but you’d want to confer with a land use attorney who has familiarity with the issue. When laws are passed there generally is some consideration for  businesses and structures that were established before passge. You want to explore this issue.

3. In reviewing the ordinances generally, I do see there are exceptions. You or your attorney may want to explore them.

4. I noticed that the distance from a hydrant can be expanded beyond the maximum footage when the home has a sprinkler system. If this is a new home, it may already have such a system. If not, the cost should be explored while, at the same time, verifying that the county will grant you an exception for a sprinkled home. (You might consider sharing some of the cost if necessary – it’s better than a vacant space.)

5. I also notice that measuring the fire hose distance is along the access road (obviously). I’m wondering if you could create a spur road to the less accessible homes.  I say this even though it might involve some cost to you. Why? Because knowing that your current roads couldhamper fire engine access might create some liability to you as the park owner.

6. Lastly, I cannot tell how helpful the assistant fire marshal was, but obviously she, or thefire marshal,  need to be contacted again, this time to explore solutions. As you note, this can’t be the first time the issue has arisen. I’m guessing you will find some alternative(s) that will work. And armed with this information going forward, I suspect you will have this issue at the forefront when placing additional homes in your park. Good luck! 

Member Follow Up:   I appreciate that Phil was able to research the circumstances a bit.  FYI, I stumbled through this frustrating situation and was able to resolve the problem just like Phil suggested.  We do have a home coming into the park which we are going to share the cost (around $5200) for the installation of a sprinkler system in a new 24x36 home.  The city, county and state fire Marshall have agreed to allow future homes into the park with the stipulation that they have sprinkler systems installed if in excess of 600’ from the hydrant.  In the event that we have someone wishing to have new home placed, they will have to bear all the cost. The poor woman that got into the middle of red tape in placing her home was as much as a “victim” of the changing regulations as we were.  Should we decided to buy and resell the home, the cost will include the fire suppression system. 

Answer: The answer is found in ORS 90.302 (Fees allowed for certain landlord expenses). What follows is a brief summary: (1) A landlord may not charge a fee at the beginning of the tenancy for an anticipated expense (i.e. one that has not actually occurred). (2) A landlord may not require the payment of any fee except as provided in this statute. (3) The specific fee must be described in a written rental agreement. (4) The following list are the fees a landlord may charge: a. A late rent payment, pursuant to ORS 90.260. b. A dishonored check, pursuant to ORS 30.701 (5). [Note that the amount of the fee may not exceed the amount described in ORS 30.701 (5) plus any amount that a bank has charged the landlord for processing the dishonored check.] c. Removal or tampering with a properly functioning smoke alarm, smoke detector or carbon monoxide alarm, as provided in ORS 90.325 (2). d. The violation of a written pet agreement or rule relating to pets in a facility, pursuant to ORS 90.530. e. The abandonment or relinquishment of a home during a fixed term tenancy without cause. [Note that the fee may not exceed one and one-half times the monthly rent. A landlord may not assess a fee under this section if the abandonment or relinquishment is pursuant to ORS 90.453 (2) (Termination of tenant who is victim of domestic violence), ORS 90.472 (Termination of tenant who is called to active state service) or ORS 90.475. (Termination of tenant sue to service with Armed Forces)] f. If the landlord assesses a fee under (e) above: i. The landlord may not recover unpaid rent for any period of the fixed term tenancy beyond the date that the landlord knew or reasonably should have known of the abandonment or relinquishment; ii. The landlord may not recover damages related to the cost of renting the dwelling unit to a new tenant; and iii. ORS 90.410 (3) (Effect of tenant failure to give notice of absence) does not apply to the abandonment or relinquishment. (5) Noncompliance with written rules or policies. [Note that the fee may not exceed $50.] (6) A fee may be assessed under paragraph (5), above, only for the following types of noncompliance: a. The late payment of a utility or service charge that the tenant owes the landlord as described in ORS 90.315. b. Failure to clean up pet waste from the tenant’s space other than the home itself. c. Failure to clean up garbage, rubbish and other waste from the tenant’s space other than the home itself. d. Parking violations. e. The improper use of vehicles within the premises. (7) A landlord is not required to account to a tenant for, or return to, the tenant any fee. (8) Except where the tenant abandons or relinquishes the space during a fixed term tenancy [see (4) e above], a landlord may not charge a tenant any form of liquidated damages, however designated. (9) Nonpayment of a fee is not grounds for termination of a rental agreement for nonpayment of rent - but is grounds for termination of a rental agreement for cause. (10) The above laws regarding fines do not apply to: a. Attorney fees; b. Applicant screening charges; or c. Charges for improvements or other actions that are requested by the tenant and are not required of the landlord by the rental agreement or by law.

Even when you have solid evidence that a resident has violated the lease or your community’s rules, he may try to turn the tables by questioning your motives. Unless you’ve applied the rules fairly and consistently, you could suddenly find yourself on the defense if it looks as though you’re acting in a discriminatory manner.

For example, the resident may argue that you took a hard line against him for breaking the rules only because he was a member of a protected class, and his claim could get some traction if he can show that you allowed other residents—who did not share his protected characteristic—to get away with the same or similar infractions. Evidence of inconsistent enforcement of your rules could lead a court to conclude that his violation of the rules wasn’t the real reason for evicting him, but merely an excuse to cover up unlawful housing discrimination.

Avoid the temptation to bend the rules for some people, but not for others, just because you happen to be friends with them or you think they’re nice people. You may not intend to discriminate against anyone, but treating some residents better than others may give the impression that you have discriminatory reasons for holding other residents to higher standards.

The owners and managers of a single-family rental home in Idaho recently agreed to pay $15,000 to settle allegations that they violated fair housing law by refusing to rent the large home to a married couple because they have more than four children.

The federal Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to deny or limit housing because a family has children under the age of 18, make statements that discriminate against families with children, and impose different rules, restrictions, or policies on them.

The settlement resolves a HUD charge, alleging that the homeowners discriminated against a family attempting to lease their 2,600 square foot, four-bedroom rental home because they have seven minor children. Specifically, HUD’s charge alleges that when the couple met with the property manager about renting the home, he told them that the owners had set a limit of four children for the home. The charge also alleges a policy restricting the number of children was written in the rental contract.

“Persons attempting to provide a home for their family should not have their housing options limited because they have children,” Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement. “Today’s action will hopefully serve as a reminder to all housing providers of the importance of meeting their obligations to comply with the requirements of the Fair Housing Act.”

By:  Kurt Plaster, MAI
        Director BBG   VALUATION + ADVISORY + ASSESSMENT
         1220 SW Morrison, Suite 800
         Portland, OR 97205
         P 503-478-1014   C 503-593-7726
         KPlaster@bbgres.com

Most of an owner's or manager's experience with an appraiser corresponds with purchase, sale, or refinancing of a park. However, appraiser's do not only work for the bank. They can also help in estate planning or valuation services surrounding tax issues (among other things). 

As objective market participants, an appraiser can provide insightful consultation services as well. Whether it is insight to market rental rates, trends in rental increases, or expense structures (to name a few), an appraiser's understanding of valuation can potentially help improve a park's cash flow or operating margins. Further, they can provide relevant data to support you during the sale negotiation process.

Range of Services

• Appraisals and consulting for financial institutions, attorneys, accountants, private individuals, etc.
• Market and Feasibility Analysis
• Portfolio Valuation
• Arbitration/Dispute Resolution
• Private estate planning/filing

Critical Valuation Issues

• In-Depth Market Analysis: Market supply/demand analysis. Surveying current rental and occupancy rates. Forecasting occupancy and potential rental increases.
• In-Depth Operating Income/Expense Analysis

We focus on providing superior communication with our clients to offer the best possible solutions to their appraisal or other valuation related needs. We provide appraisal, advisory and consulting services on the full spectrum of mobile home park and RV park related facilities.

Contact Kurt Plaster, MAI or Alex Annand for more information.