HOUSE BILL REPORT
SHB 1445
BYHouse Committee on Judiciary (originally sponsored by Representatives Wineberry, Armstrong, Padden, O'Brien, Cole, Crane, Anderson, Heavey, Brough, Valle, P. King, Lewis, Jacobsen, Patrick, Unsoeld, Baugher, Leonard, Meyers, Scott, Haugen, Zellinsky, Lux, Ebersole, Brekke, Kremen, Betrozoff, Pruitt, Ballard, May, Fuhrman, Doty, Sutherland, Sanders, Jesernig, Todd, Silver, Moyer, Locke, Rasmussen, Ferguson and Winsley)
Prohibiting drug-related activities in rental dwellings.
House Committe on Judiciary
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (15)
Signed by Representatives Armstrong, Chair; Crane, Vice Chair; Appelwick, Brough, Hargrove, P. King, Lewis, Locke, Meyers, Moyer, Padden, Patrick, Schmidt, Scott and Wineberry.
House Staff:Charlie Gavigan (786-7340)
AS PASSED HOUSE FEBRUARY 11, 1988
BACKGROUND:
The Residential and Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant Acts list several duties the tenant must meet. The landlord and the tenant may also contract to other duties in the rental agreement. A violation of any of these duties by the tenant is justification for the landlord to initiate eviction proceedings.
A tenant is evicted through an unlawful detainer action. The landlord must follow specific notice requirements which are outlined in statute. If the tenant does not cure the default or defect within the specified period, then the landlord may proceed with an unlawful detainer action. This civil action provides for a show cause hearing, where the parties and the witnesses are orally examined by the judge, which is held between 6 and 12 days from the service of the order for the hearing on the tenant.
If the tenant loses or defaults at the show cause hearing, the judge orders a writ of restitution issued, which restores the premises to the landlord. Once served on the tenant, the writ is enforced by the sheriff after three days unless the tenant posts a bond. If the tenant posts a bond, a trial is scheduled and the tenant remains at the premises pending the outcome of the trial.
Many rental agreements prohibit the tenant from engaging in illegal activities on the premises. Here drug-related activity on the premises is justification for an unlawful detainer action based on a default in the rental agreement. However, where no such language is included in the rental agreement, the landlord may evict a tenant for illegal activities only if the activity violates a rule the landlord and tenant have agreed to, or if the illegal activity is a "nuisance" or a "business".
The burden of proof in civil actions is less than the burden in criminal proceedings. In civil actions, which include unlawful detainer, the burden of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. In criminal proceedings, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore a person could be found to have engaged in illegal conduct in a civil action, but found not to have engaged in illegal conduct for the same activity in criminal proceedings because of the different burdens of proof.
SUMMARY:
A tenant is prohibited from engaging in drug-related activity on the premises. If the tenant does engage in drug-related activity the landlord can use the standard unlawful detainer action, or an expedited unlawful detainer action is available where certain law enforcement activities have occurred.
When the basis for an unlawful detainer action, or an expedited unlawful detainer action, is that the tenant engaged in drug-related activity at the premises: (1) there is no period after notice where the tenant can avoid eviction by ceasing the drug activity, (2) a tenant cannot remain at the premises after being served with a writ of restitution by posting a bond, and (3) set off is not available to the tenant as a defense.
In order to use the expedited eviction process, the tenant must have violated a statute defining drug activity, and a law enforcement agency must have: (1) obtained a warrant, (2) arrested the tenant, and (3) confiscated drugs at the premises. The warrant and arrest must be based on drug activity at the premises. A tenant has a right to a hearing under the expedited unlawful detainer provisions if such a hearing is requested within three days of service of the complaint and the notice of a right to a hearing. The law enforcement agency must reasonably attempt to discover the identity of the landlord when the law enforcement actions necessary for an expedited eviction proceeding have occurred.
The proof of a violation of a statute defining drug activity is based on a preponderance of the evidence since this is a civil action; a criminal conviction is not required.
It is a defense to the crime of a landlord knowingly renting or knowingly fortifying a unit for drug use by the tenant that: (1) the landlord notified a law enforcement agency of the drug activity or (2) the landlord processes an unlawful detainer action.
EFFECT OF SENATE AMENDMENT(S): The amendment removes provisions in the bill that provide for a more expedited unlawful detainer process when specific law enforcement actions regarding drug-related activities at a rented premises have occurred. Also removed from the bill is the requirement that the law enforcement agency reasonably attempt to discover the identity of and notify the landlord when the law enforcement actions necessary for an expedited eviction process have occurred.
Fiscal Note: Not Requested.
House Committee ‑ Testified For: Ron Fragner, Washington Apartment Association; Bill Logan, Lewis County Sheriff; Arnold Fox, South Sound Rental Association.
House Committee - Testified Against: Jerry Sheehan, ACLU.
House Committee - Testimony For: The bill will reduce the amount of time it takes to evict tenants who engage in drug-related activity. Landlords need a way to evict tenants who disturb the neighborhood and damage the property because of drug activity in the rented unit. This would help in fighting drugs.
House Committee - Testimony Against: There are constitutional concerns regarding the bill because it takes away a tenant's right to a hearing in an expedited unlawful detainer action when certain law enforcement actions have occurred involving the tenant's alleged drug activity.
VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:
Yeas 94; Nays 2; Excused 2
Voting Nay: Representatives Belcher, Wang
Excused: Representatives Lewis, Sayan