Advocacy Update

 

Forrest WallWritten by Forrest Wall, CAE, Staff Vice President and Industry Relations

Electronic Eviction Notification Legislation Passes Michigan House

A revised version of House Bill 4038, which proposes to amend the Revised Judicature Act to allow a landlord to deliver an eviction notice by electronic mail, has passed the Michigan House of Representatives. The legislation requires that the person in possession of the premises must specifically consent in writing to electronic service, and a landlord could not refuse to lease to a prospective tenant because the prospective tenant declines to consent to electronic service. The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for action in that chamber.

Amendment to Elliott-Larsen Act Introduced

Bills have recently been introduced in the Michigan House of Representatives and Senate to amend the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act. House Bill 4411 and Senate Bill 255, propose to amend both the title and section 502 of the act relating to real estate transactions. The legislation would add victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking to the protected classes under section 502. Currently, Michigan’s civil rights law prohibits discrimination in real estate transactions on the basis of religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, familial status, and marital status.

Utility Shut-Off Restriction Introduced

Legislation was introduced to amend the Michigan Public Service Commission Act relating to utility shut-offs. The bill would add a new section to the act stating that electric and natural gas utilities shall not shut-off service to a residential rental property unless the utility sends notice to the owner of the property by first-class mail not less than 14 days before the specified date of shut-off.

Oral Arguments Heard In Disparate Impact Case

The United States Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in a case challenging the validity of the disparate impact rule. A decision by the Court – expected in the next few months – will have significant impact on apartment owners because the rule has called into question the legality of some common industry practices, such as criminal background screening. Although the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had previously interpreted the Fair Housing Act as prohibiting practices that are non-discriminatory in intent but nonetheless may disproportionately affect protected classes, it was not until 2013 that it formalized a rule. Two previous cases accepted by the Court ended in settlement, thus providing no resolution to the matter. This case, Inclusive Communities Project v. Texas Department of Housing, centers on the allocation of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.

This entry was posted in May 2015. Bookmark the permalink.