AB 183 / SB 179 Reaches the Senate

The new anti-tenants' rights bill AB 183 / SB 179 will be discussed at a public hearing held by the Senate Committee on Insurance and Housing this coming Wednesday, June 5, at 10:30 AM!

On May 14, it was passed by the Assembly in a party-line vote. Democrats refused a third reading of the bill, so that it wouldn't be sent directly to the Senate. The bill has been added to the agenda for the Assembly floor session on June 6.

Controversial Anti-tenant Bill Rammed Through Legislative Process

Controversial anti-tenants’ rights bill AB 183 was approved in a party-line vote at an Executive Session of the Assembly Housing and Real Estate Committee today. It will be debated on the floor of the Assembly on Tuesday, May 14, just over two weeks after it was first circulated for sponsors on April 29. Republicans added an amendment making several changes to the bill on Tuesday, May 7. At the hearing today, Representative Janet Bewley (D 74th district) requested more time to review both the bill and the amendment: “I protest that acting on the amendment and the bill now is not up to our standards.”

Tenants’ rights advocates have expressed concern about the speed with which the bill is being moved through the legislative process. “Even if you don’t care about the fifty-plus tenant-landlord law changes in AB 183,” said former alder and longtime housing rights activist Brenda Konkel, “you should care about the shame that the Assembly Republicans, the Wisconsin Realtors’ Association, and the Apartment Association of South Central Wisconsin are making out of our democracy.”

AB 183 would abrogate many tenant-landlord laws in municipalities, including over twenty Madison laws. On Wednesday, May 7, Madison City Council unanimously approved a resolution opposing AB 183. Speaking against AB 183, Mayor Paul Soglin said that the proposed legislation would undermine efforts to improve Madison neighborhoods, and he questioned the idea that tenant-landlord law should be uniform across the state: “Cities where renters make up fifty percent of the population are different than other areas [of Wisconsin].”

If AB 183 becomes law, it will make numerous changes to current tenant-landlord law at the state and municipal levels:

-It eliminates or alters laws that protect tenants’ property, making it easier for landlords to tow a renter’s vehicle, dispose of property left behind in an eviction, and take extra fees and fines out of security deposits.

-It legalizes so-called “crime-free” lease provisions prohibited by current law. Such clauses may discourage tenants from calling the police in emergencies and may be used by landlords to punish tenants for crimes committed against them or crimes that have nothing to do with them. An amendment to the bill stipulates that such provisions should not violate Wisconsin laws protecting victims of stalking and domestic abuse, but the language introduced by the amendment does not make exceptions for other kinds of crime. Advocates for victims of domestic violence continue to express concerns that the amendment is inadequate to protect victims and would have unintended consequences if it becomes law in its current form.

-It attempts to speed up the eviction process, by requiring courts to rule on the issue of possession of the property (i.e. whether the tenant must vacate the property) within 30 days of the return date of the summons, permitting county governments to allow summons by mail in eviction actions, and requiring the court to render judgment and issue a writ of restitution immediately upon a determination in favor of the Plaintiff (landlord). It also creates a bait and switch rule that would allow a landlord to continue pursuing an eviction even after receiving rent (or any other kind of payment) from a tenant.

-It makes it easier for landlords to charge tenants for pest control, even in situations when it is unclear who caused the infestation.

If it is signed into law, AB 183 will be the third anti-tenants’ rights law since Republicans took over the state government in 2010. 2011 Wis. Act 108 severely restricted municipal control over tenant-landlord law and nullified decades worth of pro-tenant laws in Madison, Dane County, and Fitchburg. In 2012, another anti-tenants’ rights bill, SB 466 (now 2011 Wisc. Act 143), was fast-tracked through the legislature in a similar fashion. One of the last bills to be passed during a marathon 33-hour Assembly session in March, 2012, it was signed into law just over one month after being introduced.

“The bill’s authors say that this law is intended simply to modernize existing law,” said Colin Gillis, an organizer for the Wisconsin Alliance for Tenants’ Rights, “but their actions tell a different story. Large property management companies and organizations that represent their interests are taking advantage of a Republican-controlled state legislature to rewrite tenant-landlord law in Wisconsin, and they are hoping nobody will notice.”

AB 183: Moving Rapidly Through the Legislative Process

An amended version of AB 183 has been added to the agenda for the Executive Session of the Assembly Housing and Real Estate Committee to be held on Thursday, 5/9, at 10 am. It has been added to the Assembly calendar for Tuesday, May 14.

The City of Madison Common Council will vote tonight on a resolution opposing AB 183.

Visit this site for more updates on the bill and WATR's response to it.

Devastating Anti-Tenant Bill Being Fast-tracked

Public Hearing on Thursday, May 2

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

MADISON, WI - Housing advocates have learned of new legislation that would erode tenants’ rights in the middle of a national housing crisis. AB 183 was still without a formal number when, on Tuesday April 30, it was added to the agenda for a public hearing to be held on Thursday, May 2. If passed, it will make sweeping changes to landlord-tenant law at the state and municipal levels.

“The bill’s sponsors are fast-tracking this legislation because they don’t want it subjected to public scrutiny,” said Colin Gillis, an organizer for the Wisconsin Alliance for Tenants’ Rights. “The last time Republicans rushed a bill altering tenant-landlord law through the legislature like this, it had several unintended consequences, which this new bill, among other things, seeks to correct. This style of governance is bad for Wisconsin landlords and renters alike.”

The bill corrects several unanticipated effects of 2011 Wis. Act 143. For example, one provision of AB 183 restricts the right of a tenant to sue a landlord for double damages to violations related to security deposits and illegal lease clauses. This closes a loophole created by Act 143. The earlier bill made it possible for tenants to sue landlords for double damages, court costs, and reasonable attorney fees for almost any violation of tenant-landlord law. “Act 143 was not intended to expand consumer protections for tenants,” Gillis explains, “but this was its effect. Its actual outcome was the opposite of its intended outcome.”

AB 183 would make significant changes to Wisconsin state laws:

-It eliminates or alters laws that protect tenants’ property, making it easier for landlords to tow a renter’s vehicle, dispose of property left behind in an eviction, and take extra fees and fines out of security deposits.

-It limits a landlord’s legal obligation to disclose uncorrected building code violations, by requiring that landlords disclose such violations to tenants only when they have received written notice about them from a building inspection agency. As a result, landlords who own property in areas where there is no local housing code enforcement agency will have no legal obligation to disclose uncorrected building code violations, even if they know about them.

-It attempts to speed up the eviction process, by changing the return date for eviction actions from 5 - 30 days to 5 - 14 days, permitting summons by mail in eviction actions, requiring the court to issue a writ of restitution within five days of the determination of eviction, and allowing a landlord to continue pursuing an eviction even after receiving rent (or any other kind of payment) from a tenant.

-It makes it easier for landlords to use bad references to retaliate against former tenants, by limiting their legal liability for references. The new law stipulates that the courts should assume a landlord is acting in good faith when giving references unless the tenant can furnish proof to the contrary.

-It forces tenants to pay for pest control, even in situations when it is unclear who caused the infestation.

AB 183 is the second law sponsored by Republicans since they won majorities in the Senante and Assembly in 2010 that restricts municipal governments’ local control over tenant-landlord issues. 2011 Wis. Act 108 wiped out decades worth of protections for tenants in Madison and Dane County. AB 183 would have a similar effect, nullifying at least twenty regulations developed by local legislators, law enforcement, landlords, and renters to meet the needs of Madison’s unique rental market.

It would severely limit a landlord’s obligation to inform new tenants about their rights and to disclose information about a rental property. For example, landlords will no longer be required to notify tenants about occupancy limits, disclose conditions that create an unreasonable risk to personal injury, and inform tenants about their right to abate rent. It also removes limits on late fees, and it removes a landlord’s legal obligation to provide prospective tenants with an explanation when their rental application has been denied.

“Lawmakers in Madison and Dane County developed these regulations in consultation with landlords and tenants,” explains former alder and longtime housing advocate Brenda Konkel, “and they codify good business practices that are in everyone’s best interests.”

Housing advocates are urging Wisconsinites who oppose the bill to contact their legislators immediately.

For more information on the bill, read this article by Brenda Konkel.

The Wisconsin Republicans are At It Again!

The WI Republicans are at it again. SB 107 and SB 466 rewrote tenant-landlord law to make life easier for landlords and harder for tenants. Now, LRB 1931/2, another monster of an omnibus bill, is being circulated through the legislature. We need to mobilize now to protect our rights!

Stay tuned for updates about the bill and our efforts to protect tenants rights!

More details on how SB 466 / AB 561 is a complete mess

From Brenda Konkel...

After working at the Tenant Resource Center since 1991, I have no idea what the laws will be if AB561 passes. It is full of inconsistencies, items that are unclear and unintended or unstated consequences.

Example 1: How is this going to work?

"A landlord shall provide to a new residential tenant when the tenant commences his or her occupancy of the premises a standardized information check-in sheet that contains an itemized description of the condition of the premises at the time of check-in."

The very next sentence reads.

"The tenant shall be given 7 days from the date the tenant commences his or her occupancy to complete the check-in sheet and return it to the landlord"

So, who fills in the check in sheet, the landlord or the tenant? If both, how does that work?

Example 2: What does this mean?
"704.95 Practices regulated by the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection. Practices in violation of this chapter may also constitute unfair methods of competition or unfair trade practices under s. 100.20. However, the department of agriculture, trade and consumer protection may not issue and order or promulgate a rule under s. 100.20 that changes any right or duty arising from this chapter."

Generally speaking, 704 says things like the tenant has the right to exclusive possession of the property. Then DATCP rules say that the landlord has to give 12 hours notice to enter. Would that kind of rule, since it changes a right (right to enter?) or duty, no longer be able to be promulgated? What kind of rules would they be able to promulgate? Only rules that are not mentioned in 704?

There's more, there is much more. This bill is terrible.

Stay tuned for yet more details on how this bill is going to make life more difficult for tenants and clog the courts with unnecessary litigation...

SB 466 has been placed on the Senate Calendar for tomorrow

This bill, which will have many negative consequences for tenants, has been scheduled for a vote on the Senate floor tomorrow.

The bill may unintentionally remove tenants’ entitlement to double damages, court costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees for money illegally withheld from security deposits or for failure to return security deposits within 21 days.

The bill prohibits tenants from contacting a building inspector to register a repair problem before they have first given their landlord written notification of the problem.

The bill would overturn a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in Baierl v. McTagger, which determined that one illegal non-standard rental provision in a lease will render the entire lease invalid. The bill would thus remove the only extant disincentive for landlords against including illegal non-standard rental provisions in a lease. Landlords could include a non-standard rental provision saying that they will evict tenants or increase their rent for calling the police or emergency services. Such provisions are designed to intimidate tenants.

The bill allows property left behind to be taken at the landlord’s discretion. At the public hearings for the bill, several attorneys explained that, in the event that the landlord withheld property that the tenant had left behind unintentionally (i.e., not as garbage), there would be many lawsuits over their ability to take this property.

You can sign a petition against the bill here.