H.B. 516 Landlord Communication Amendments: transcript

House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee, Feb 18, 2026

1. Vice Chair (presiding)1:23:28

   Uh, HB five 16, landlord communication amendments, um, everybo. So we're gonna, we do have, uh, eight or seven more items on the agenda Committee public. Let's, let's keep it moving quickly. Let's, let's be concise. Um, thank you, Representative Shallenberger. Go, go ahead. Okay.

2. Rep. David Shallenberger1:23:47

   Uh, this is a pretty straightforward bill. Um, welcome Dave Todd from the, um, he's a landlord attorney and an expert in this industry. Uh, this bill just does a couple different things. It deals with dangerous situations in, uh, rented, uh, rented housing, uh, in two different areas. One would be where they are dangerous conditions that is, would be determined where imminent life, loss of life is, um, from a situation in house or significant physical harm. And if that is present, then the landlord can terminate the agreement, get 'em out of the house, away from the harm, and fix the condition. And then this also adds a condition where if there is a dangerous condition, um, a deficient condition, then and the landlord determines that he can't fix, normally he can do one of two things. He can either fix the condition, for example, he might get a furnace repaired or a window replaced, or some pipes or plumbing fixed. But if he determines that he can't fix that condition while the tenant is there, he can give a notice to determinate, have them leave in 10 days as is used in other areas of this same code, uh, for similar conditions. And then they can fix the, the property. And so, for the sake of time, I can give you examples, but for the sake of time, I'll wait and see if those are questions. Um, there's one last section, section in here that's new that says if somebody has a dog or a pet that bites somebody, then the landlord can terminate the agreement based on that. 'cause it, uh, reasoning there is that it opens up, uh, the landlord for liability because it's now a known hazard to have a pet like that on the premises. So that's the bill would love. Any questions? And if you, that concludes our presentation. Alright,

3. Vice Chair (presiding)1:25:42

   Thank you representative. We'll take it to the committee for clarifying questions. Representative.

4. Unknown committee member1:25:53speaker not certain

   Thank you. Mr. Vice Chair. Can you determine what, uh, define what is uninhabitable, what qualifies to trigger this law?

5. Rep. David Shallenberger1:26:03

   Um, right now it's just, uh, specified online, 1 63. It says, if an owner believes that a the residential unit is not, have not habitable, uh, and he can't fix the problem with the tenant in there, then he could terminate the agreement. So it, so it's at the landlord's discretion on what is uninhabitable. Can I chime in here? Yes, please.

6. Vice Chair (presiding)1:26:29

   So, uh, go ahead, introduce yourself. Yes, thank you.

7. David Todd, attorney, Titan Legal1:26:32

   My name's David Todd. I'm an attorney with Titan Legal. Uh, we primarily represent property managers landlords in Utah. We, we work in this statute, uh, every day. The, the definitions, there are definitions already in the statute about what is considered to be a deficient condition, what's considered to be a dangerous condition. And, and so those are outlined. They are pretty broad currently. Uh, and it's that balancing act of how specific do you get with everything, or leaving it a little bit broad that, that I, I think right now where it's at goes for both the, the landlord and the tenant. So currently the law allows a tenant to provide a landlord with a notice of a deficient condition that says, Hey, there's this deficient condition, which currently is defined as a condition of the unit that impacts the habitability of the unit, right? And these are these words like, okay, well what does that mean? But that's really where it's at right now. And so a tenant right now can say, Hey, there's this deficient condition, landlord, within three days, you need to fix this. And if you don't do this, then they've got some options. The, the tenant can, uh, stop paying rent and leave in 10 days and get their deposit back. Uh, or they can fix it themselves and then bill a landlord for that. And so this is now, but how the law has been is it's, it's been, the tenant is the one that dictates that and says, this is what it is. Uh, what we see often is a situation, for example, like a flooding situation where flooding has occurred and the landlord looks at it and says, Hey, we've gotta deal with this. We've got issues with the flooring, we've got issues with the walls, uh, potential mold issues, all sorts of things like that. And, and they need to get in there and remedy that. And, and the tenant says, well, no, you're not coming in to do that. And we say, well, we, we've gotta get in there to protect the property. Currently, there's nothing in the statute that gives the, the landlord the opportunity to kind of do what the tenant has the opportunity to do, which is to say, there is a habitability issue here and here's what we're going to do about it.

8. Unknown committee member1:28:50speaker not certain

   Okay. One follow up question. How did you land on the 10 days notice? If it is determined to be deficient,

9. Rep. David Shallenberger1:28:59speaker not certain

   I'm happy to address that too, but representative, I'll jump in there. And, and the existing statute of the, uh, the existing statute on line 1 41, line 1 49, uh, and at least in, uh, line one 11, it already uses 10 days for deficiencies to before, before they can leave, before the termination, the agreement is terminated. Is that right?

10. David Todd, attorney, Titan Legal1:29:20

    It is, yeah. And, and that's where, um, in other places in the statute, when a landlord is terminating tenancy related to some kind of violation of the lease or something like that, it's three days. Um, on issues of habitability, it's just, it's been 10 days. That's, that's where it's been. And so this was, I I, I think this was looking at what it currently is, and it was determined that 10 days is kind of a, um, a, a good place to land. So

11. Vice Chair (presiding)1:29:50

    Thank You. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you Representative Peterson.

12. Rep. Peterson1:29:54

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, as somebody that used to get these calls all the time by renters complaining about the landlord's living conditions, I just wonder is, is this, could this be calm my nerves, I guess, about this being utilized as a tool to get an unwanted tenant out of, uh, contract if the landlord didn't do their job to maintain a property? I guess, help me understand how this plays into that.

13. David Todd, attorney, Titan Legal1:30:25

    So I, I, I think that's a legitimate concern. However, I, I don't think that this is going to be used very often. Um, the, the issue that we, that we really run into is if there is a legitimate issue, so a tenant is saying, Hey, This, this exists here, right? Like, this is, this is what it is. They have every right to get out of there. And, and the problem right now, and I think it would be, it wouldn't just be easy for a landlord to say, Hey, it's not habitable. You need to leave. They'd still have to go through all of the steps. If that's a disputed issue, they'd have to go through all the steps they normally would of, uh, providing evidence of that. They'd give a notice. The tenant would have the opportunity to dispute that as well. So it wouldn't just be, you know, in, in Utah, we don't have self-help options for eviction. So a landlord can't just go in and say, okay, I gave you the notice. You're not out in 10 days. It's locked up and you're done. There's still a whole process, due process that they'd be able to use and go through.

14. Vice Chair (presiding)1:31:34

    Okay. Thank you. It appears there are no more questions. We'll, uh, who here from the public would like to speak to? This looks like we have four. Um, I'm going to try and limit this to One minute. We're gonna do a, a minute and a half so we can keep this moving. You're good. Uh, go ahead and if you wanna speak to it, go ahead and fill in and then we'll, we'll kind of call on you. So you're, so you're ready to go? Someone have A Go ahead. Introduce yourself. Uh, let us know who you represent.

15. Jake Anderegg, lobbyist, National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials1:32:06

    Uh, my name is Jake Andre. I, uh, I'm a lobbyist representing naro, which is the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officers. It's the housing authorities. So, um, the concern, uh, that we have with the bill is that, uh, it's, it's vague in its language as to what may constitute a deficient, uh, condition within the home. And I think to mi Mr. Chair, to Representative Peterson's point, could this be used to get rid of a, an an annoying tenant? That's a possibility. We think of, it's probably rare, but it's, it's a possibility. Uh, the second issue with it is the 10 day, which does mirror the existing statute, creates a condition where, uh, a a tenant could find themselves in a desperate situation, struggling to find, uh, a new place to live in a short period of time, acknowledging to the full extent that, that the landlord needs to be able to get in there and make repairs and sometimes is not able to do so within a reasonable timeframe, and therefore it causes a problem for the landlords. And so it, it does feel to them like it's heavy on one side and, and not so heavy on the other side. So because of the vagueness, and then there's vagueness also with, um, whether or not, and, uh, they would get any portion of their rent that was paid that month back a prorated share. Um, so in conclusion, uh, I'm speaking against the bill, but I will say to the sponsor's credit, before coming into this, uh, meeting today, they did agree to sit down and to work on language that would be, uh, that we could work through what some of our concerns are. So I'd like to thank them for that opportunity. Um, noticing the lateness of the session, uh, we still oppose the bill in its current form, but we would love to see some of the changes that we discussed out in the hall incorporated in our request of this committee. If they should move this bill forward, is to help us make sure that those changes do get incorporated. And thank you. We'd be open to any questions you may have.

16. Vice Chair (presiding)1:34:15

    Thank you. Appreciate it. Again, there are two other mics up there. Go ahead and sit up there. We'll, we'll, you guys can sit by each other. It's okay. So let's keep 'em full so we can keep it moving. Go, go ahead and introduce yourself. Thank you.

17. Steve Erickson, lobbyist, Crossroads Urban Center1:34:30

    Yes. My name is Steve Erickson. I represent Crossroads Urban Center. I, um, echo what, uh, Mr. Andre just said about willingness to work with a sponsor on this. We've not had a chance to speak about it, um, quite yet. I've worked with him on other bills this session, and I know he is, uh, open to, um, discussion, but it's not ready for prime time yet. Uh, I was, uh, involved with the original, uh, fit Premises Law, which was passed in 1990. Um, the reason that some of this language is in here is not because it's, uh, was, uh, considered to be, uh, state of the art at the time. In fact, I remember calling this, uh, the original Fit Premises Act, the Slum Lords Protection Act. Um, there are problems with this bill that we can fix, and it's well past time that some of these be looked at. For instance, the, the, this section on, uh, pa uh, line 50, um, three Days to Fix, and then the 10 days that you've already discussed, um, those were just, um, pulled out of the air at the time. Um, we had at the time, a, the Uniform Fit Premises Law that we were, um, promoting as an alternative to the act that actually got passed. So, uh, this is an, a good opportunity for a major update of this act that was passed, what, 30, 30 something years ago. So, um, would look forward to having those kind of conversations. I can list four or five sets of lines that I think were, there certainly would be room for some improvement and, and compromise. So with that, thank you for your time. Thank,

18. Vice Chair (presiding)1:36:11

    Thank you. I appreciate, we appreciate your comments. Uh, go ahead.

19. Justin Allen, Government Affairs Director, Rental Housing Association1:36:16

    I thank you Justin Allen on behalf of the Rental Housing Association, and appreciate Representative Shallenberger, uh, sponsoring this bill. Uh, we have heard from our membership that there is a real, uh, need for some type of solution in this scenario. Um, certainly open to continuing to explore the best way to, to do this, but, um, would appreciate, um, the legislature's, um, support of helping us try to find a solution for this, this session for these, um, rare situations where there is a, a, a serious habitability issue that needs to be resolved. And there have been unfortunate cases where, um, and understanding the difficulty of this issue, you know, the tenants are not wanting to vacate even when there is a, a need for something to be resolved. And so we'd love to find a good process that we, people can feel good about. We, we, uh, have had some conversations already about trying to, um, you know, find something that will work. And so would appreciate your support for moving forward with helping us find a solution for this. Thank you.

20. Tara Rollins, Executive Director, Utah Housing Coalition1:37:17

    I think. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Tara Rollins and I'm with Utah Housing Coalition. And, um, I'm one of the people that were out in the hallway talking about this bill and as written, um, we don't, um, like the bill, but we agree that there's, um, we wanna make sure that the landlords are held whole, um, as well as the tenants. And we think that we can come to agreement on language, um, to get there. And so we hope that we can move this bill forward and, um, we can work on this. And I agree, I think Steve is right. We could look at, um, this much deeper during the interim session, um, and work on this with a larger group of people off, off the hill, and then come back next year and have a really strong, um, bill for everyone. So thank you.

21. Vice Chair (presiding)1:38:08

    Thank you. Appreciate that. Um, hi,

22. Angela Kraniski, lobbyist, Utah Safe and Stable Rentals Project1:38:11

    my name's Angela Kki. Um, and I am here, um, I got my live BS license last week because I love tenants. I was a tenant for 16 years starting at BYU, and then when we moved to Texas for my husband to do medical school, and then when we moved to Connecticut for five years while he did residency, and then back to Davis County where we were victims of landlord retaliation, that is technically legal in uni in Utah, whereas 40 other states have statutory bans against landlord retaliation. Um, and so I have a lot of issues with this bill. Um, and can I pass out my handouts for this bill? Uh, why don't you stick 'em on the end? We'll get 'em, get 'em later. Sure, sure. Sorry if that's okay. Alright. Um, we'll, we'll review 'em. Um, go ahead. So, um, and I would respectfully request, um, four minutes if that's okay. Um,

23. Vice Chair (presiding)1:39:11

    You have 30 seconds.

24. Angela Kraniski, lobbyist, Utah Safe and Stable Rentals Project1:39:12

    I have. Okay. Um, so I can't do justice to that in 30 seconds. Um, um, and what I have to say doesn't only have to impact tenants in Utah. It has impacts on our suicide crisis, our mental health crisis, our homelessness crisis, our housing supply crisis, and the affordability crisis. And if you can please just give me four minutes then. Um, sorry,

25. Vice Chair (presiding)1:39:40

    Our agenda is full. We, we don't have four minutes. Okay.

26. Angela Kraniski, lobbyist, Utah Safe and Stable Rentals Project1:39:43

    We have another meeting at six o'clock where we Gotta get Sure. Can I have one more minute please?

27. Vice Chair (presiding)1:39:48

    Sorry. 15 seconds.

28. Angela Kraniski, lobbyist, Utah Safe and Stable Rentals Project1:39:50

    Okay. Um, so all of those crises in in Utah are affected by our unequal, um, landlord and tenant rights. And, um, I would just say that, um, if we want, if we're serious about making things affordable for Utahans and ending all of these crises that I just, um, mentioned that we would, we would completely reject this bill.

29. Vice Chair (presiding)1:40:25

    And I say that Thank You. Thank you. Appreciate it. I understand there, there's a lot in there. Okay. Um, looks like, do we have anybody on line? All right. That we're gonna close public comment. We'll take it back to the, the committee for further action.

30. Chair Malloy1:40:43

    Chair Malloy. Thank you Mr. Vice Chair. Uh, I'd like to make a statement and reserve your right to make a motion, um, representative, we've heard your presentations and, uh, we've heard from almost everybody that you have been out in the hall working through a lot of these details. It feels like it's not quite there. And, uh, so my motion is gonna be that we hold it. Uh, I kind of hate to do that, but I kind of feel like it's just not ready to go. So my motion is to hold the bill. Hmm.

31. Vice Chair (presiding)1:41:24

    It's, it's technically not an order. Mr. Chair. It's what? You, you, um, we we're gonna go to Representative Dunnigan real quick.

32. Rep. Dunnigan1:41:32

    Thank you. So, I, I move to hold for all the reasons that our good chairman stated, there's some stuff in here. It, it needs more work and I'm not comfortable senate it to floor. Hopefully you can fix it, get it back on a committee. Probably won't diminish your chances are what they are at this point in the session, but I don't know, I'd like to see some more work on myself.

33. Vice Chair (presiding)1:41:57

    Thanks. Okay. Uh, that's in order. The, the motion is that we hold, um, if you're light as honest to speak to the motion to hold. All right. Uh, to the sponsor. Uh, Representative Shallenberger, would you like to, to speak to the motion, to the hold?

34. Rep. David Shallenberger1:42:19

    Um, yeah. I, I would. The partners that we've met here, the housing coalition, we've expressed, uh, willingness to commit to continue to talk with them. They've expressed willingness to continue to talk with us. We're very close, just to tidy this up, and they, they felt comfortable moving forward. As long as we commit to doing that, we do commit to that and, uh, would be happy to make sure we get that across the finish line.

35. Vice Chair (presiding)1:42:46

    Okay. Thank you. We'll, That, that's it. All right. To the committee and back to the sponsor and then to the maker of the motion waive. Okay. Alright.

36. Vice Chair (presiding)1:42:58

    The motion is that we hold, do a roll call. Vote Representatives. Ballard? Yes. Burton? Yes. Dunnigan? Yes. Ivory? Yes. Matthews? Yes. Winn? Yes. Peterson? Yes. Sawyer? Yes. Thurston? No. W Yes. Chair Malloy? Yes. Chair Kyle? Yes. Okay. Uh, alright. Rule that, uh, the passes we are with, uh, Representative Thurston and no Thank you committee. Thank you representative. Alright. Alright.