Bill requiring housing providers to accept pets is halted
Housing providers will continue to have the discretion to allow household pets or not after an ominous piece of legislation has been withdrawn from this year's legislative session by its author, Assemblyman Matt Haney.
We have seen laws surrounding animals in rental units evolve, culminating in AB 2216, legislation that would have eliminated no-pet policies. The bill was later amended to exempt buildings with 15 or fewer units, allow landlords to carry liability insurance, ensure their furry friends are licensed and vaccinated, and charge additional security deposits.
Now we can report that the legislation has been shelved altogether.
Of course, housing providers still must allow tenants to have service animals trained in specific tasks such as guiding the blind, alerting deaf persons, mobility assistance, alerting of medical conditions, and the like.
Emotional support animals (ESAs) are a different subject. In the not-so-distant past, a law allowed landlords to request documentation from a licensed healthcare professional with a pre-existing relationship with a patient to verify the need for ESAs).
No more tampering with security deposit and tenant screening fees
AB 2785 would have required housing providers to pay interest to tenants on security deposits provided the deposits were placed into interest-bearing accounts. The misguided legislation would also cap tenant screening fees at $50. It outlined certain events when landlords would be required to return a screening fee to prospective tenants who did not survive the application process.
Moreover, the bill would have obligated housing providers to accept reusable screening reports from rental applicants. Under current law, this is optional.
Housing providers not punished for climate change
There have been many responsibilities foisted upon landlords as they have been asked to use their properties for the greater public good, but for now, they do not have to be directly accountable for climate change.
AB 1786 did not survive the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill aimed to add "climate change and climate change exacerbated conditions" to the list of emergencies that trigger anti-price gouging laws designed to prevent opportunistic businesses from taking advantage of consumers during emergencies by significantly raising prices for essential goods and services, including rent.
As it is now, California is in a perpetual state of emergency. Somewhere, at any given time, there is a flood, storm, fire, drought, or other natural disaster that puts rent caps in motion. But the abstract concept of climate change is not tied to an identifiable event with a specific end date, as our industry partners stated.
Parting
thoughts
