Admin Order 53-24-02-F -- Amended Rental Housing Code Rules

Home Browse Search

Exhibit A to Administrative Order No. 53-24-02-F well-meaning property owner into serving a termination or rent increase notice in a manner only allowed under very specific circumstances, and the rule does not include the right to post-and-mail notices. The commenter suggested that the rule be amended to say any legal notices served under the code must be served in accordance with ORS 90.150, 90.155 and 90.160, which would meet the requirements of the code as well as state law. Response: The notice requirements in the City Code and proposed amendments relate specifically to notices required by the City – they do not control notices required by other regulatory entities. The commenter’s suggestion that the rule amendments simply incorporate statutory notice requirements is inconsistent with City Code requirements; therefore, no changes are being made to the proposed amendments as a result of this comment. 13. One commenter suggested in section R-8.430-G.2(b), 3(d), and 4(d) that the rule should default to the method by which monies must be returned to tenants in general under state law: first class mail, personal delivery, or if allowed by written agreement, by electronic means. The commenter noted that refund of monies by electronic means is only allowed under very specific circumstances and is concerned landlords may be misled that City Code supersedes state law. Response: The relocation assistance payment requirements in the City Code and proposed rule amendments relate specifically to relocation assistance required by the City – they do not control payments or refunds of monies required by other regulatory entities. The proposed amendments have been updated to require the relocation assistance be paid directly to a tenant(s) listed on the rental agreement and allow three payment options: (1) A cashier’s check delivered by first-class mail or in person; (2) A traceable electronic payment method such as a cash app, or an electronic bank transfer if allowed under the written rental agreement; (3) A cash payment with a receipt. No other changes are being made to the proposed amendments as a result of this comment. 14. One commenter proposed adding the words "or exceeding" to the phrase concerning rent increase notices for relocation assistance. The commenter is concerned that the current wording does not adequately address the exemption in ORS 90.323 for buildings constructed in the last 15 years from the maximum rent increase cap. Response: The list of events that trigger relocation assistance were moved to section R-8.430-H Relocation Assistance – Payment Reporting and the bold language was added to "(12)(c) issuance of a rent increase notice for a rent increase equal to or exceeding the maximum annual rent increase percentage as set by the State of Oregon pursuant to ORS 90.324”. 15. One commenter expressed concern that requiring tenants to specify the delivery method of their termination notice can become a procedural hurdle for tenants, potentially invalidating the tenant’s notice due to a technical oversight. The commenter stated the delivery method is usually apparent from the notice itself, making the requirement redundant and potentially problematic. Response: In response to this comment, the proposed amendments have been modified to remove the language from R-8.430-G.4 (c) that requires the tenant to include the delivery method in the tenant’s written notice of termination.