AAOC Legislative
Committee Vs. Bad Legislation
A Recap of Our Recent
Lobbying Trip to Sacramento
By: Nicholas A. Dunlap
As Californians, we are burdened with overregulation in
contrast to neighboring States. As an
industry, apartment owners and operators in the Golden
State face even greater regulation
in addition to constant threats from Legislators. It is important for us to interact with our
lawmakers and remind them who we are, what we do and how these issues impact
and affect our business. On April 25th,
AAOC visited our State’s Capitol in conjunction with the National Apartment
Association, San Diego County Apartment Association, Apartment Association
California Southern Cities, Apartment Association Greater Los Angeles, Santa
Barbara Apartment Association, East Bay Rental Owners Association and Northern
California Rental Property Association to discuss and advise on four bills
currently pending in the Senate & Assembly.
In total, we had over 100 representatives of the aforementioned
associations present. Needless to say,
we had our hands full.
Apartment owners are constantly under attack and we
effectively utilized our strength in numbers to represent & defend the
property rights of apartment owners of all sizes. AAOC Legislative Committee members Alan
Dauger, Nicholas Dunlap, Ray Maggi, Rick Roshan and John Tomlinson had a busy
day meeting with more than 12 elected officials. Please read on to see some of the bills we
worked to prevent from becoming laws.
Legislators Want Free
Rent For Your Tenants
Two of the more disturbing bills
that we opposed actually wanted to give your tenants free rent. SB 1191 put forth by State Senator Joe
Simitian would require a defaulting property owner to notify prospective tenants
of the default prior to renting to them.
The penalties for failing to notify prospective tenants of the impending
default are equal to two months of rent for every month not notified. So, your prospect rents an apartment, moves
in for two months and then decides that he or she wasn’t notified and BAM!
That’s four months of free rent you would owe your tenant. We see this bill as a landlord’s worst
nightmare. Imagine you buy a building
that had been foreclosed on and all of a sudden, you become liable for the
months of free rent owed to tenants who had not been notified of the previous
foreclosure. Even if the tenant had been
notified, by the time you go through two owners (the bank and current owner
which is a six month process), a tenant could possibly forget. In this case again, the burden of proof is on
the landlord.
The required disclosure would affect the unit’s
marketability, ultimately resulting in higher vacancy, decreased income and
would effectively expedite the foreclosure process. The other free rent bill, AB 1953 carried by
State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano would require tenants to be notified of any
change in ownership or management within 15 days of the change. Now logically, the first thing that you would
do as a new owner or manager would be to notify residents of who and where to
send their rent to. Here, landlords are
again put on the defensive as this required notification would open up the door
for tenants to say “I wasn’t notified.”
The penalty for failing to notify a tenant of where to send their rent?
You guessed it: free rent! This would cover any changes in vesting (perhaps
from an individual to an LLC) or management company. If anything, this requirement does exactly
the opposite of what it is supposed to do.
That is, it would open up the door to frivolous or fraudulent scam
tactics to steal rent from hardworking tenants and innocent landlords.
Proposed Pool &
Smoke Detector Bills Would Require You to Be a “Jack of All Trades”
Not bad enough that you have to arrange maintenance, do a
rent survey and market your vacant apartment home for rent, SB 1394 brought by
Senator Alan Lowenthal would require you to consult local building code each
and every time a tenant vacates so as to ensure you are in compliance with
smoke detector requirements at that point in time. If not in compliance, you would be forced to
renovate. We argued that this is overly
burdensome on landlords who have never been forced to upgrade buildings at the
time of rent. Smoke detector technology
has not changed in 20 years and yet we are being forced to hold a rentable unit
off market until building code can be checked.
This would keep your incoming tenants out of their new home longer and
would result in an additional loss of income to you as you sort through the voluminous
building code books to ensure your compliance.
Wait, it gets better.
If you’re like me, you train your resident manager to market
and lease apartment homes, keep residents happy and identify maintenance issues
before they become problems. State
Assemblyman Michael Allen pushed for AB1726.
This is a bill that would require your on-site manager, leasing agent,
maintenance tech or other set of eyes and ears to attend 14 hours of schooling
every 5 years to certify them in such tasks as: chemical management,
calibration of pool controllers, operation of surface skimmers, etc. Perhaps the best part about this ridiculous
piece of legislation is that the City of Los Angeles
previously thought up this concept and then dropped it because it was such a
waste of time.
Now, follow me through some
simple math as we review the records
of 65,000 pools over a 10 year time period in
the proposed legislation. Described
by the legislation, there are 65,000 pools X
3,650 days (that’s 10 years X 365 days in a year) and we arrive at 237,250,000
total pool days. In that time, there have been just 186 recorded chemical accidents. That is, there is one accident for every 1,275,537
pool days. That is just one incident every 3,392 years. And
the new law would require us to attend a class every 5 years? Few would argue
we could improve on the current ratio of incidents to pool days. I certainly would not. Further proof that our lawmakers just don’t
get it.
We have it pretty good in Orange
County but our neighbors in
Southern and Northern California
manage to keep us busy. Three of the
four Senate and Assembly Bills that we opposed were carried by Northern
California Legislators, further pleading the case for a split State. Joking aside, this is a battle that we will
continue to fight and hope to win.

No comments:
Post a Comment