This is an excerpt from an update email I sent to supporters and explains what the City Council passed yesterday. There is a clip at the end from KIRO where I was interviewed.

The first bill the Council passed was CB 119787, legislation that disallows, in effect, screening a potential resident out for an eviction during the emergency and six months after the emergency is over. There were two amendments that passed (here and here). The first amendment was a technical adjustment to language and the second adds a “rebuttable presumption” that means a defense to an eviction can be that eviction information was used anyway, perhaps from a public records search. 
This legislation on its face doesn’t do much since during the same period few evictions if any will be possible. The advocates on the other side, however, definitely have designs on banning of all eviction records for screening. Fortunately , they didn’t make that grab here. 

The the Council passed CB 119788 which mandates a payment plan. I’ll just quote from the legislation, 

The tenant shall pay one month or less of overdue rent in three consecutive, equal monthly installments. The tenant shall pay over one month and up to two months of overdue rent in five consecutive, equal monthly payments. The tenant shall pay over two months of overdue rent in six consecutive, equal monthly payments. 

Any remainder from an uneven division of payments will be part of the last payment. The tenant may propose an alternative payment schedule, which, if the landlord agrees to it, shall be described in writing and signed by the tenant and landlord and deemed an amendment to any existing rental agreement.

If a housing providers moves to “terminate” a tenancy for lack of payment he or she must notify the resident of the payment plan.  An amendment by Councilmember Herbold to extend this period from 6 months to a year wasn’t offered or considered. 

In my view, all by themselves, this legislation doesn’t do all that much damage except that it will be nettlesome to administer and opens housing providers to problems if a mistake gets made (like not giving the notice of the payment plan, for example). There is also nothing that holds the resident accountable for non-payment. Given the Mayor’s silence on all this, I think it doesn’t make sense to ask for a veto on these. 

Some of you might find it interesting that Councilmember Gonzalez thanked the Washington Multifamily Housing Association (WMFHA) for their input on the legislation.