OLYMPIA — House lawmakers approved a controversial measure Monday evening to prohibit landlords from raising a tenant’s rent more than 7% in a 12-month period.
House Bill 1217 passed 53-42 and will now head to the Senate for consideration.
Under the bill, rent increases are limited to 7% during any 12-month period. A “striking amendment” adopted by House lawmakers on the floor included a provision that the legislation does not prohibit landlords from adjusting rents after a tenant moves out. The proposal also requires landlords to notify tenants of any new rent increases at least 90 days in advance, instead of the six-month notice proposed in the original bill.
An earlier version of the bill limited move-in fees and security deposits for all tenants, but it now only applies to tenants in manufactured homes. Initial late fees for manufactured home tenants are capped at 2% of the tenant’s total rent in a month, with that cap increasing every month after rent is overdue.
An exemption applies to units that are 12 years old or less, a change from the earlier version exempting units less than 10 years old. Additionally, if an owner of a triplex or fourplex lives in one of the units, limits on rent increases would not apply.
The bill also allows tenants or the attorney general to sue to enforce compliance.
During the floor debate, Rep. Julia Reed, D-Seattle, spoke in favor of the proposal. Even though she is a landlord herself, she believes the legislation will work to help renters facing rising rent. She said she thinks the legislation is a balanced approach to managing affordability in the state.
Although the state has done a lot to increase housing supply, Reed said, she doesn’t believe enough has been done to “help the thousands upon thousands of renters in our state who are just asking for a little regulation and predictability.”
“As a landlord, I’m also asking for that,” Reed added.
According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, nearly 1.1 million renters live in Washington state.
Republicans and some Democrats spoke against the measure Monday.
Rep. April Connors, R-Kennewick, said she believed that the bill would not stabilize the housing market, and would in fact do the opposite.
“This is a great bill for Idaho,” Connors said. “It’s a great bill for Montana, and it’s a great bill for Arizona, because just the hint of this bill is causing our developers to start moving towards those states.”
Connors said she was aware of a developer in Seattle who decided to end production in Washington and is moving to Arizona, adding that the loss of developers will impact state tax collection as well as the “broader economic scale of construction jobs lost.”
The House version of the bill is sponsored by multiple Democrats, including Rep. Nicole Macri, D-Seattle. It was originally sponsored by Sen. Emily Alvarado, D-West Seattle, who was sworn into the Senate shortly after the start of the legislative session this year.
While a companion bill was also introduced in the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, has noted in previous interviews that his caucus intends to use the House version as the vehicle to pass the legislation this year.
More than 70 amendments were introduced prior to the debate on the bill, but most were withdrawn, ruled out of order or not adopted.
The bill contains an emergency clause, so if it is passed by the Senate and signed by Gov. Bob Ferguson, it takes effect immediately.
The Legislature will adjourn April 27.
The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.