HOUSE BILL REPORT

 

 

                               SHB 932

 

 

BYHouse Committee on Housing (originally sponsored by Representatives Nutley, Padden, Leonard, Ebersole, Sanders, J. Williams, Lewis, Doty, Nealey, L. Smith, Brough,  Winsley, Wineberry, Silver, Ballard, Betrozoff, Taylor, Miller and D. Sommers) 

 

 

Relating to rental payments to landlords from public assistance.

 

 

House Committe on Housing

 

Majority Report:     The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (8)

     Signed by Representatives Nutley, Chair; Leonard, Vice Chair; Barnes, Ebersole, Padden, Sanders, Todd and J. Williams.

 

     House Staff:Kenny Pittman (786-7392)

 

 

                   AS PASSED HOUSE JANUARY 18, 1988

 

BACKGROUND:

 

The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) is authorized as the single state agency to administer public assistance programs.  The administration of public assistance programs must be in conformance with federal laws as well as be consistent with state public assistance laws.

 

DSHS presently administers its public assistance programs with provisions for protective and vendor payments on behalf of recipients.  These provisions allow DSHS to make payments from public assistance funds when recipients are incapable of self- care or when directed by recipients as a vendor payment.

 

SUMMARY:

 

The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) is instructed to study a program to have public assistance funds paid directly to landlords by DSHS when voluntarily requested by the public assistance recipient.  A pilot program is to be developed by DSHS using from three to seven local governing bodies from throughout the state to determine the feasibility of a statewide program and whether the program would increase the supply of housing available to persons on public assistance.

 

DSHS is required to report on the study findings by the October 31, 1987 and on the progress of the pilot program by the convening of the 1988 legislature and again in 1989.  The act expires June 30, 1989.

 

 EFFECT OF SENATE AMENDMENT(S)The study phase of the pilot project is eliminated.  The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) is required to provide written notification to the recipient that the landlord can not require direct payments from DSHS.  The direct payment to the landlord is limited to the lessor of ninety percent of the monthly public assistance grant allocated for rent, as determined by DSHS, or ninety percent of the rent.  The landlord must enter into an agreement with participating local governing body to participate in the pilot program.  The landlord is required to notify DSHS of any planned termination of tenancy of the tenant.  The local governing body: 1) shall charge the landlord a monthly two dollars fee to cover the cost of administering each direct payment, which shall not be charged to the tenant; and 2) may charge a fee up to fifty dollars to inspect and certify that the housing unit meets the applicable housing quality standards used by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Section Eight Existing Housing program.  DSHS is directed to recover incorrect payments from landlords, not recipients of public assistance. The expiration date is revised to June 30, 1991.

 

Fiscal Note:    Requested March 3, 1987

 

House Committee ‑ Testified For:     Robert Krueger, Mobile Home Park Owners Association; Don Eldridge, Thurston Rental Association; and Carroll Duval, Apartment Operators of King County and Seattle.

 

House Committee - Testified Against: Barbara Baker, Legal Services; and Tony Lee, Washington State Catholic Conference.

 

House Committee - Testimony For:     Having payments come from DSHS could make housing more available to those on public assistance.  Landlords could be more certain of payments, and could therefor make more units available.  A pilot program could be considered to deal with administrative questions and concerns.

 

House Committee - Testimony Against: It would be difficult to administer such a program.  The fiscal impact could be significant.  Landlords could try to force tenants on public assistance to "volunteer" to have funds sent directly to the landlord, or refuse to rent to persons on public assistance.  Further study encouraged.

 

VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:

 

     Yeas 91; Nays 1; Excused 6

 

Voting Nay:     Representative Wang

 

Excused:   Representatives Allen, Bumgarner, King R, Schoon, Smith C, Todd