Legislature(1993 - 1994)
04/01/1993 03:00 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 222 USE OF RENTED PROPERTY/LAW VIOLATIONS TAPE 93-31, SIDE B Number 001 REP. JEANNETTE JAMES, PRIME SPONSOR of HB 222, stated that HB 222 was introduced in response to a concern that current landlord-tenant laws were weighted in favor of protecting abusive tenants. REP. JAMES added that HB 222 had three principal purposes: 1) amends the forcible entry and detainer statutes; 2) makes the tenant's responsibility to maintain the dwelling unit more stringent; and 3) amends the nuisance abatement statutes. REP. JAMES concluded that HB 222 would provide much needed protection for landlords as well as for responsible tenants from the damage caused by abusive tenants. Number 137 JAMES FISHER, ALASKA LEGAL SERVICES CORP., testified against HB 222. Mr. Fisher's comments follow: "This plea is made as, and from, the viewpoint of an attorney with 20 years experience in private practice of law, and who has sympathy for the conflicting pressure(s) upon legislators. In those 20 years I represented only landlords, and from that perspective comes this amicus comment on HB 222. "HB 222's legislative history appears based on: a) anecdotal experience, which may overlook areas of unintended impact which leads to the next assumption; b) that the proposed HB 222 will protect an unsuspecting landlord against those to be called "outlaw" tenants. "First, the outlaw tenant probably causes most, if not all, of the anecdotes related as a reason for HB 222. Such a person, or persons, will evade a rental contract regardless of legislation existing or proposed. To suggest a statute can stop such behavior is like having confidence murder will be deterred by laws prohibiting killing people. "The best way to avoid the outlaw tenant is scrupulous attention to existing law; i.e., get deposits, check references closely, if rent is late immediately advise that such performance will not be tolerated, etc. "What should really worry legislators is the problem of raising constituent expectations that HB 222, or other changes to existing law, will solve the `outlaw' tenant problem. When the proposed law doesn't work, what next?" ANNETTE COOK testified from Fairbanks in support of HB 222. Ms. Cook stated that this bill would balance the rights between landlords and tenants. MYRNA SHEETS testified from Fairbanks in support of HB 222. Ms. Sheets said the current law is unfair to landlord's. Ms. Sheets stated that HB 222 would not hurt good tenants at all, but would protect landlord's from the "outlaw" tenants. Number 202 HAROLD HUME, a LICENSED REAL ESTATE BROKER, stated that HB 222 would help legal costs and help get "outlaw" tenants out before they caused damage. Number 223 BETTY JOHNSON testified in support of HB 222 and echoed the above comments. Number 234 SAM HELMS testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222 and pointed out that he has had over $10,000.00 worth of damage done by the so called "outlaw" tenants. Number 254 JEROME BYRD testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Byrd stated that he has personal experience with the outlaw tenant. Number 262 DOUGLAS ISAACSON, STATE DIRECTOR for CREDIT SERVICES. Mr. Isaacson stated that his service exists to help landlords avoid the outlaw tenant. Mr. Isaacson supports HB 222. Number 299 ALICE BREWER testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Ms. Brewer reiterated the above testimony. JOE GRAHAM testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Graham dittoed the above supportive testimony. CHARLES LIPPITT testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Lippitt stated that screening of tenants does not always work. He said HB 222 is needed to get the bad apples out sooner. Number 350 JOHN TODD testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Todd stated that he is a landlord who checks references, credit reports, gets a deposit and has a complete application process for potential tenants and still has some slip through the cracks. He said HB 222 would be one way for landlords to protect themselves from a bad tenant. HANS METZ testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Metz noted that HB 222 would screen out the professional tenants who have no intention of paying the rent and know how to play the game of protecting themselves under the current law. EUGENE DEVINE testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Mr. Divine dittoed the testimony above. Number 396 DIXIE DIXON testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Ms. Dixon pointed out that police cannot help with landlord tenant problems because they are understaffed. Ms. Dixon also pointed out that adult guardians of teenagers have to be responsible for them and their actions. Number 440 RUTH PEGER testified from Anchorage in support of HB 222. Ms. Peger stated that the law is too protective of the tenant and provides very little relief for the landlord. Number 457 RICHARD ILLGEN, an ATTORNEY representing both landlords and tenants, stated he made the following observations on the bill: there will always be bad tenants; HB 222 would hurt small commercial business, as the outside large entities would want to rent to the more established business's instead of newer small Alaskan enterprises; there would be more lawsuits against landlords to tie up the court system; HB 222 does more harm than good; and renters that work on the slope and are honestly unaware of a conflict could be thrown out before they have a chance to solve the problem. Mr. Illgen suggested that the committee take another look at the bill. Number 509 MARK BUTTERFIELD, ATTORNEY, LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATIONS, spoke against HB 222 for two reasons: 1) HB 222 is unfair; it takes what was a good balance between landlords and tenants under current law and gives the landlord all the power, and 2) there is such a thing as a bad landlord and this bill gives no balance for the tenant in that situation. Number 578 REP. SITTON moved HB 222 with individual recommendations and two fiscal notes. No objections were noted; it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|