Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rental Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate debates rental-application fee bill and local-control amendment, then circles measure
Summary
Senate Bill 42, which would allow landlords to charge voluntary rental-application fees under specified procedures, prompted a heated floor debate over tenant protections and local control; an amendment to preserve local ordinances failed and sponsors asked to circle the bill for further work.
Senate Bill 42, a measure to regulate rental-application fees, drew extended debate on the Senate floor Feb. 10 as senators weighed property-rights, tenant concerns and municipal authority.
Sponsor Senator Wadhams told the Senate that the bill does not mandate landlords charge application fees; rather, it sets a voluntary, even-handed framework for background checks and reasonable fees. "This does not mandate rental application fees. It does not say a landlord has to charge them... This is a totally voluntary thing on the part of the landlord," Wadhams said, adding that local counties reported background-check costs typically range from about $9 to $35.
Opponents urged local control. Senator Davis offered an amendment to allow local ordinances to forbid application fees (originally drafted as "if expressly permitted" but revised to "unless expressly forbidden by local ordinance"). Supporters of local control argued that municipalities such as Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County had already chosen to prohibit such fees and that a statewide rule could override local policy for large rental markets.
Landlord advocates and other senators said requiring local authorization would effectively prevent landlords statewide from using the fees and would create regulatory burdens. "I have 13 rental houses... It's very difficult to find people who are financially responsible to rent those units," said one senator opposing the amendment, warning that the bill would help landlords screen applicants and reduce landlord costs associated with criminal or meth-lab remediation.
Senator Suazo emphasized local impacts, noting, "38 Percent of the housing units in Salt Lake City are rentals," as context for municipalities' interest in the issue.
The Davis amendment (as revised) failed on the floor after a division vote. After substantial discussion and concerns about unresolved questions, senators voted to "circle" SB 42 — effectively pausing floor action and returning the bill to the calendar so sponsors can refine language and consult stakeholders.
What happens next: The bill is circled for further study and potential amendment; proponents and opponents will likely continue negotiations before the Senate resumes third-reading consideration.
