To the Honorable Senator Colleen Hanabusa &
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee,
I am writing this to you as a private citizen to voice my opposition to SB
2675 SD1, which would "prohibit landlord-tenant agreements from
prohibiting pets in dwelling units."
As an condominium unit owner & resident who chose to live in a complex
that disallows pets, I feel my rights as a homeowner will be trampled on
in favor of pet owners who choose to void our pet-free by-laws and
lifestyle with this imposing legislation.
Our complex has been a pet-free zone for more than 20 years and I want to
keep it that way.
My reasons for opposing this bill are as follows:
* Pets in rental units will decrease the value of those units as
well as surrounding units due to issues relating to noise, smells,
maintenance, liability and personal responsibility.
* There is no guarantee that pet owners will be responsible for
their pets whether it be inside their units or within the common areas of
a dwelling. Who is liable if renter A’s pet bites homeowner B? Is the
renter, landlord or community association liable for any kind of personal
harm or damage caused by a renter’s pet? Who is going to pay for damages
if I am bitten by someone’s pet? Animals will be animals and there is no
guarantee that they will be well behaved at all times. Ask Sigfreid and
Roy that.
* Animals are known to emit foul odors. In my building odors from
cooking and smoking sometimes permeate through the common hall areas as
well as into my unit from time to time. This problem will be compounded if
an irresponsible owner does not pick after his pet and let those kinds of
pet odors to permeate the premises.
* Noise from barking dogs, talking birds and other types of
critters can be a problem if the pet is not disciplined. Barking dogs can
be especially intimidating to the elderly and children who live in the
building. Playful pets can also encourage children to be more noisy than
they are when interacting with pets.
* Maintenance: Who will pay for damaged common areas caused by
renter’s pets? I am sure most community and condo associations will pass
this cost on to residents, both resident homeowners as well as renters
through higher maintenance fees. I assume that maintenance fees will be
increased to cover liability insurance that associations will need to buy
in order to cover themselves from pet liability issues.
* The obvious side of the maintenance issue is the fact that
landlords will face increased costs due to pets who destroy rental units,
translating into higher rental costs or deposit fees. Someone has to pay
for pet wear and tear.
* There are people who are allergic to animal dander and shedding
fur who will be impacted in a negative way by this legislation. Will these
people be forced to share common areas such as hallways and elevators at
the same time as pet owners walking their dogs or cats?
* Will all residents be forced to share common areas with pet
owners known to have hostile pets? For example, pit bull terriers? Will
resident children be put at risk due to a hostile pet?
* There is no guarantee that pet owners will properly clean-up
after their pets within their units or common areas of dwellings. Who am I
going to complain to if I step in doggie’s poop? Currently we have no
problem like this because no animals are allowed on our property.
* Our rights as a homeowner residents and current/future landlords
must be upheld over those perceived rights of transient and rental pet
owners in a place that we purchased and have chosen to be animal-free.
I am sure that testifiers opposed to this legislation will bring forth
other reasons why this is not a good bill. The bullet points that I have
outlined above are reasons why I oppose this bill. This kind of
legislation has to be killed in committee today and not be allowed to
pass.
