Home sellers and landlords may no longer refuse potential homebuyers or tenants based on their source of income. Those who dare to do so may face up to $2,500 in daily fines. If the city attorney takes action on the violations, the court may issue a $50,000 fine for a first violation and $100,000 for subsequent violations.
The ordinance mainly offers assurance of guaranteed housing for those who rely on government assistance to acquire housing, such as Section 8 participants. Those eligible for Section 8 housing vouchers include those who are homeless or low income.
The ban even received support from Councilman Sal DiCiccio, often the odd vote out on controversial council issues. DiCiccio was the first to put the proposed ban on the agenda, according to Mayor Kate Gallego.
However, DiCiccio noted that he was voting in favor of the ban only in spirit, not physically, since he gave his word to realtors that he wouldn’t support banning income discrimination for homebuyers.
DiCiccio said income discrimination was a form of institutionalized racism.
“People know I don’t use the race card, I just do not, unless I believe it’s true,” said DiCiccio. “I looked at it more when it came to dealing with the Homeowners Associations who create deed restrictions. Deed restrictions are made to keep people out, not keep people in.”
DiCiccio said that he sees these kinds of gatekeeping even within his own community, which is a majority white, liberal community.
“I was shocked by it. I live in a mixed household myself, and I feel very strongly about it. Diversity does improve your community, it just does. It’s an important factor in our lives. You want as many people around you that have differing viewpoints, differing ideas, different looks,” said DiCiccio. “[Source of income discrimination] is a type of institutionalized racism that I have strong concerns over.”
According to DiCiccio, the Arizona Multihousing Association (AMA) said they would sue the city over this ban. DiCiccio said that the AMA should be ashamed for considering that response. The AMA represents the apartment industry in the state, with over 2,000 members.
“I would be embarrassed if I were them, to threaten to sue the city of Phoenix after what we’ve done for them over the years and taken the lead on,” said DiCiccio. “My plea to you: don’t embarrass yourself.”
Courtney Gilstrap LeVinus, AMA president and CEO, said in a statement to reporters that these kinds of policies would only make the housing crisis worse. LeVinus was critiquing a proposed bills from State Rep. Analisa Ortiz (D-LD24) that would ban income discrimination (HB2085), prohibit landlords from evicting for partial rent payments (HB2083), and allow rent caps (HB2086).
“[These policies are] curtailing the rights of property owners, making it more difficult for companies and mom-and-pop owners to stay in business and to provide homes for individuals and families,” said LeVinus.
Instead, LeVinus proposed reducing bureaucratic rules to improve homebuilding speeds.
“We need to slash away layers of bureaucracy and fight the rampant NIMBYism that makes building new homes such a slow, torturous process,” said LeVinus. “Doing so would address the housing crisis, not make it worse, and help ensure the Arizona economy continues on a steady upward trajectory.”
DiCiccio further claimed that institutions exist which actively discriminate against people attempting to get housing based on the color of their skin.
“A lot of individuals that are poor or people of color in particular are locked out of certain areas. They just are. Either it’s an affordability issue, or you’ve got this institutionalized type of programming in place that does not allow them in there,” said DiCiccio. “I think that’s just sick, personally. I think people should have the ability, freedom to be able to go into those communities that they want to move into. That’s how God made us, they gave us the free ability to move.”
Vice Mayor Yassamin Ansari said that over 15,000 residents were on a waitlist for affordable housing assistance.
“We need to do everything in our power to ensure that our residents have access to adequate housing and that are actually able to utilize the programs that are intended to help them, like Section 8, disability, and others,” said Ansari.
Ansari criticized the state legislature for supporting income source discrimination, mainly referring to the Republican legislators leading an effort to prevent hotels and motels from being required to accept housing vouchers from the homeless. The vice mayor said that the legislators should be spending their time increasing funds for affordable housing projects.
“It’s time for the legislature to do its job so Phoenix can do its job to ensure housing affordability,” said Ansari.
Councilwoman Betty Guadardo said she empathized with the activists present at Wednesday’s council meeting. The councilwoman equated modern income discrimination with the discrimination that people faced during the Civil Rights Era, when homebuyers were discriminated against based on the color of their skin. A large group of activists showed up to speak in favor of the income discrimination ban.
“Discrimination has no place in the city of Phoenix,” said Guadardo.
Guadardo confirmed that the city of Phoenix was following the example of the city of Tucson, which banned landlords from discriminating against potential tenants’ source of income last September.
Ordinances have a 30-day wait period; however, the council is awaiting an opinion letter on the subject from Attorney General Kris Mayes. Should the opinion letter be unclear or unfavorable, then the city would have to reconcile any legal issues before enacting the ordinance. Councilwoman Laura Pastor expressed concern that the legal obstacles would leave the city without the capacity to enforce the ordinance.
“I have been briefed that there is a possibility that we don’t have the capacity to enforce it,” said Pastor.
City Manager Jeff Barton speculated that there may not be enough city staff to enforce the ordinance. However, Barton couldn’t say for sure.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Arizona Attorney General’s Office is warning consumers to be on alert against property rental scams. As the Arizona housing market continues to price many out of purchasing a home, a growing number of residents are seeking rental properties.
According to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office (AGO), scammers are seizing the opportunity to prey on unsuspecting consumers. Two of the most prevalent scams involve individuals advertising rental properties that they do not own or manage, and individuals advertising rental properties as a way to obtain personal and banking information to steal identities.
Landlords looking to lease their property are also advised to be aware of individuals offering to pay deposits or rent with certified funds in excess of the actual amount owed, and requesting the excess funds be wired back to the renter. Return the check or wait until the certified funds have cleared your account before returning any excess funds.
The AGO offers the following tips to consumers seeking to rent homes and apartments:
Be skeptical of rental prices “well below” market price for similar properties.
Look up the property address on a search engine to verify that the property is not “for sale” elsewhere, or physically drive by the property to verify that it actually exists.
Be wary of poorly written rental descriptions that include misspellings or bad grammar.
Avoid companies or individuals listing rental properties who are not reachable by phone during normal business hours; who tell you that they are out of state or out of the country; or who request communication via text only.
Be skeptical of companies or individuals charging “up front” fees in addition to the normal application and credit check fees.
Always be wary of companies or individuals requesting personal information such as your social security number and bank account information up front.
Don’t pay the security deposit until you have a signed lease.
Avoid companies or individuals requesting payments be sent overseas or by wired funds, gift cards or through peer-to-peer payment apps (such as Cash App).
Deal with reputable companies or agents who have appropriate licenses.
There are several online resources available for consumers to check appropriate licenses and review information regarding a company’s reputation. The Arizona Department of Real Estate contains information regarding licensed Real Estate Professionals. The Better Business Bureau is also a good source of information regarding a business’ reputation.
Landlords across America are owed more than $15.3 billion in rent arrears, and that amount is expected to hit nearly $19 billion by December, according to a report released last week by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia just as a federal moratorium on residential evictions expired.
In Arizona, residential rent debt – including utility costs normally paid to a landlord or management company- is estimated at more than $292,000 million across 43,900 households, That represents 5.9 percent of all renter households in the state, just above the national average of 5.8 percent out of 6.5 million households.
The Fed Reserve statistics are based on estimated rent arrears related directly to a loss of employment revenue during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is estimated that roughly 138,500 Arizonans -and more than another 15 million people nationwide- are in arrears under that criteria alone.
The justice courts in Arizona’s 15 counties are expecting an onslaught of new evictions filings, as well as a push for removal notices from landlords who previously filed for and received an order for eviction but were prevented from enforcement due to the moratorium implemented by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Arizona officials received nearly $1 billion in rental assistance, but agencies, renters, and landlords say the programs are paying out at a snail’s pace, leaving renters and landlords alike in a precarious financial position.
Many of the households that are expected to be evicted in Arizona in the coming weeks have reported not having another place to move to, in part due to damaged credit ratings and a loss of savings during the pandemic. On the flip side, many landlords in some parts of the state have a waiting list of prospective tenants ready with cash in hand to move in once non-paying tenants can be forced to move out.
Timed with the Fed Reserve’s July 30 report, President Joe Biden called on state and local governments to “take all possible steps to immediately disburse” the $45 billion of emergency funding approved by Congress as part of the American Rescue Plan.
“There can be no excuse for any state or locality not accelerating funds to landlords and tenants that have been hurt during this pandemic,” the president said. “Every state and local government must get these funds out to ensure we prevent every eviction we can.”
In the meantime, the Federal Housing Finance Agency is requiring all landlords of rental properties with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac mortgages to give renters a 30-day notice to vacate before requiring them to leave, regardless of any local court-issued eviction order.
The CDC’s eviction moratorium had been extended several times before it expired July 31. The moratorium does not relieve renters of the legal obligation of paying rent, as well as any late fees, penalties, or interest. Those ancillary costs owed by renters are not included in the Fed Reserve estimates of renter debt.
The moratorium also required renters to attest to suffering a “substantial loss of household income, loss of compensable hours of work or wages, a lay-off, or extraordinary out-of-pocket medical expenses. In addition, renters were required to certify they have undertaken “best efforts to obtain all available government assistance for rent or housing.”
Renters were also required to pledge their “best efforts” toward making “as close to the full payment as the individual’s circumstances may permit, taking into account other non-discretionary expenses,” and that if evicted, they would likely become homeless.
Eviction protection was waived under the CDC moratorium for renters who violated other terms of a lease, such as being convicted of committing criminal activity on the premises, damaging the property, or violating health ordinances or building code.
