This Fiscal Note is not an official copy and should not be quoted or cited.
Fiscal Note - SB 0088 - Landlords and Tenants: Eviction; Rights. Duties; Court Procedures

L.R. NO.  0499-01
BILL NO.  SB 88
SUBJECT:  Landlords and Tenants
TYPE:     Original
DATE:     January 13, 1997



                              FISCAL SUMMARY


                    ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON STATE FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED              FY 1998             FY 1999           FY 2000

General Revenue   (Under $100,000)    (Under $100,000)  (Under $100,000)

Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
State Funds       (Under $100,000)    (Under $100,000)  (Under $100,000)


                   ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED              FY 1998             FY 1999           FY 2000

None

Total Estimated
Net Effect on All
Federal Funds                   $0                  $0                $0


                    ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED              FY 1998             FY 1999           FY 2000

Local Government                $0                  $0                $0


                              FISCAL ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTION

Officials from the Office of State Courts Administrator (CTS) report that
there were approximately 27,500 landlord/tenant cases disposed of in FY 96.
Because of the high volume of cases, even a relatively small increase in
filings and/or an increase of a few additional minutes in procedural
requirements could combine to increase the clerical workload of the courts.
Depending on how the proposed legislation would be implemented by landlords,
there could be a significant increase in the number and complexity of the
cases.  CTS assumes that the workload increase and associated costs would
depend on the volume of additional cases that might be filed, appealed or
both.

Based on a response from CTS to a similar proposal, Oversight assumes the
additional costs to CTS would not exceed $100,000 in any one fiscal year.

Officials from the Office of Prosecution Services and the Office of the
Attorney General assume the proposed legislation would have no fiscal impact
on their respective budgets.

Officials from Jackson County - Budget Division and the City of St. Louis -
Budget Division did not respond to our fiscal impact request; however, in
response to a similar proposal in a prior session, they both reported there
would be no fiscal impact on their respective budgets.


FISCAL IMPACT - State Government      FY 1998   FY 1999   FY 2000
                                     (10 Mo.)
GENERAL REVENUE FUND

Cost - State Courts Administrator
       Costs incurred under this proposal should not exceed $100,000 in any
one fiscal year.


FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government      FY 1998   FY 1999   FY 2000
                                     (10 Mo.)

                                           $0        $0        $0


FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business

Small businesses which lease property to tenants or from a landlord could be
impacted by this proposal as it would make numerous changes in the statutes
relating to landlord and tenant relations.  These costs and/or savings would
be expected to be minimal.


DESCRIPTION

The proposed legislation would contain numerous provisions for landlords and
tenants.  Landlords would be able to terminate a lease for illegal drug
activity on the premises by the tenant or with the tenant's consent.  The
landlord would be required to pursue legal procedures to evict a tenant,
rather than entering to take possession immediately.  Thirty days' notice
would have to be given to tenants receiving subsidies.  A lease termination
for a mobile home lot would require 60 days' notice.

Personal property left on the premises by the tenant could be removed or
disposed of by the landlord after 60 days of unpaid rent and notice to the
tenant by certified mail.  The tenant could stay by responding within 15
days.  The form for the notice to the tenant about belief of abandonment
would be specified.  The landlord could collect rent by presenting the tenant
with a valid written instrument.  The landlord would not be allowed to seize
personal property to pay for rent in arrears.  The landlord would be required
to make a reasonable effort to rent property vacated by a tenant.

This proposal would require the landlord to maintain leased property in
accordance with the housing code and to make all types of repairs listed.
Specific agreements could be made to the contrary.  A tenant whose property
is not properly maintained could get a lease forfeiture, an injunction and
actual damages sustained.  A landlord's failure to maintain the property
would be considered a "forcible entry and detainer" if the tenant leaves the
property as a result.  Tenants could only be removed in accordance with a
court order.

This proposal would allow a tenant to give a landlord 14 days' notice of
major defects which cost less than $300 or one-half of the monthly rent to
fix.  If response is not made, the tenant could make the repair and deduct
the cost from the rent.  Tenants must allow reasonable access to landlords,
and landlords would be required to give 48 hours' notice prior to entering
except in emergencies.  A landlord would not be allowed to retaliate against
a tenant for filing a proper complaint against the landlord.  A tenant could
raise a defense that the landlord increased the rent in retaliation for
housing complaints made by the tenant.

This proposal would also allow an unlawful detainer action when a tenant
holds over after a mortgage has been foreclosed, after 30 days' notice.  The
doubling of damages for the unlawful detainer of property would be removed.

This proposal would also limit security deposits to one month's rent (instead
of two).  Interest would have to be kept on behalf of the tenant.  Other
limits would also be imposed upon the landlord's ability to keep the deposit.

This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other
program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental
space.


SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Office of State Courts Administrator
Office of the Attorney General
Office of Prosecution Services

NOT RESPONDING:  Jackson County - Budget Division and City of St. Louis -
Budget Division.