Utah lawmakers shut down housing bill meant to give Utahns an edge over corporate home buyers
A home for sale in Salt Lake City is pictured on Monday, July 22, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)
A bill meant to give everyday Utahns a slight edge over corporate buyers didn't survive its first legislative hurdle after lawmakers expressed concerns about restricting the housing market and potentially causing home sellers to face fair housing lawsuits.
The House Political Subdivisions Committee on Tuesday voted 5-2 to hold HB151, a bill sponsored by Rep. Gay Lynn Bennion, D-Cottonwood Heights. It's not likely to gain traction in the 2025 Utah Legislature, with the session scheduled to end March 7.
With HB151, Bennion wants to give Utahns a bit of an edge over corporate buyers of single-family homes in Utah's most populated county.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
To encourage Utahns to have first dibs on a home after it hits the market, HB151 would restrict a buyer from purchasing a home in Salt Lake County for 30 days after it's listed unless the buyer signs an affidavit of intent to live in the home for at least one year.
To avoid taking too much of a heavy-handed approach, Bennion included a provision in the bill to allow sellers to sell to anyone in the first 30 days if they claim a need to sell the home faster, or if a renter would live in the single-family home on the day the buyer takes possession of it.
'This bill provides a cooling-off period for investors in (Salt Lake County) for the purchase of single-family homes, but also respects the seller and allows for the use of an exigent circumstance to accept any offer,' Bennion said.
Her bill would also prohibit the bulk sale of foreclosed single-family homes to one buyer or more.
'The goal of this bill is to raise the moral question of home ownership to the transaction of the sale and purchase of single-family homes in (Salt Lake County),' Bennion said.
How much of Utah's housing market is corporate-owned? This county is digging into the data
She pointed to recent Salt Lake County data compiled by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy that showed 10,666 homes changed hands from non-corporate owners to corporate owners between 2018 and 2023. Utah News Dispatch reported on that data in August.
Across the nation, institutional investors impact some cities more than others — and they're not as nearly prevalent in Utah as they are in major metros like Miami, Houston and Atlanta. But Bennion argued it's still happening to a concerning extent in Salt Lake County, and that Utah lawmakers should act to find ways to help Utahns have a better chance of competing with corporate buyers that can often offer cash.
'For three years, people have shared their concerns with me that investors are cutting into home ownership in negative ways,' Bennion said. 'Some investors use algorithms, some use cash, but they all push out the individual who is coming into home ownership for the first time and doesn't have those tools and experience.'
Lisa Thompson, a real estate agent, sat alongside Bennion as she presented her bill. She said it would give people intending to live in the home a 'first shot' in the market, 'because it's hard to compete' with investors that don't have to jump through the same financing hoops as other buyers. However, she also said investors aren't as active in Utah as they were in 2020, when the West experienced a home buying frenzy amid the COVID-19 pandemic and low interest rates.
But several real estate professionals and business owners spoke against Bennion's bill, arguing it wouldn't have a practical impact on bringing down the price of homes in Utah — but rather it would cause homes to sit on the market longer.
Chris Sloan, a past president of the Utah Association of Realtors and a broker and owner of a real estate agency in Tooele, said that he supports Bennion's efforts to encourage home ownership but argued her bill would 'cause some real concerns.'
'This bill essentially requires the owners to give up first right of refusal to owner-occupied purchasers for 30 days,' Sloan said. 'First right of refusals, contractual right between buyers and sellers, is something that generally costs the seller money. Delaying a transaction for any period is expensive.'
Taz Biesinger, with the Utah Home Builders Association, also argued 'this bill will not help the affordability crisis that we have in Utah.' He said investors are 'not a big player in the marketplace, Utah is unique that way.'
'This is just not part of the equation of housing affordability,' Biesinger said.
Chris Gamvroulas, president of Ivory Development and president of the Utah Property Rights Coalition, also spoke against Bennion's bill.
'The solution to an under-supply is not to interfere in the exchange of real property between a willing buyer and a willing seller,' Gamvroulas said.
Utah lawmakers say no to 'preemption,' halt 2 housing bills aimed at allowing smaller homes
But Clark Bolin, a Murray resident, urged lawmakers to support the bill, arguing that 'merely building more homes has not worked. That's something that we keep trying, and it's not happening.'
'I don't think this is a perfect bill. And I don't think it actually goes far enough, honestly,' Bolin said, urging lawmakers to consider taxing corporate buyers at a higher rate than private owners. However, he said Bennion's bill 'starts the ball rolling on a really important conversation of home ownership and really allowing the private investor to have a leg up and a head start over corporate ownership.'
Jennifer Cottam, a real estate agent in Cottonwood Heights — a city known for its desirable real estate near the base of the Cottonwood canyons — spoke in 'strong support' of Bennion's bill, saying she's seen first-hand the impact from corporate buyers.
'I work with families who are doing everything right. They're saving. They're planning. They're working hard,' She said. '(But) especially when the market's tough and (for) lower-price point homes, they're outbid by cash offers from investors.'
However, Rep. Neil Walter, R-St. George, motioned to hold the bill rather than allowing it to advance to the House floor. While he said he's supportive of the 'principle of home ownership,' Bennion's bill 'is just the wrong tool to accomplish that policy objective.'
'I'm concerned that we're trying to use sellers as a public policy tool to make concessions … we're trying to force sellers to make concessions as part of our public policy objective,' Walter said. 'They don't have an obligation or shouldn't bear that cost.'
Walter also expressed concerns about requiring sellers to pay attention to who they're selling to, which he said could 'create an avenue where we're going to end up with a whole bunch of fair housing violations.'
The majority of the Republican-controlled House committee agreed with Walter, with only Bennion and Rep. Jake Fitisemanu, D-West Valley City, voting against his motion to hold the bill.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
The Pride Month ‘vibe shift' comes to Utah. Can Utahns find common ground this June?
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox broke with his party this week as the only Republican governor to make a statement in response to what some celebrate as Pride Month during the month of June. But he also broke from his own custom. Instead of officially declaring June 'Pride Month' — as he had his first three years in office — Cox released a simple message, similar to last year's declaration, about the importance of seeking unity and compassion. 'This June I'm reflecting on the values that bring us together here in Utah — service, respect, and love for our neighbor," Cox said in a post on X. 'To those celebrating Pride and to all Utahns: may we keep building bridges of understanding and strive always to see the humanity in one another.' As has become a common feature of the polarized discourse on social media, Cox's statement earned the ire of LGBTQ activists, for not officially recognizing Pride Month, and conservative influencers, for acknowledging the occasion at all. While it may have failed to please partisans on both sides of the spectrum, the governor's message might point to a better way to strengthen a pluralistic society, according to Paul Edwards, director of the Wheatley Institute at Brigham Young University. A focus on personal bridge-building can transcend the conflict between divisive diversity, equity and inclusion efforts that amplify identity politics, and a rigid affirmation of traditional values that ignores cultural differences, Edwards said. 'It's vital that we get this right because we do need to live together in some kind of peace,' Edwards said in an interview with the Deseret News. 'And that is possible, probably in more ways than we sometimes believe.' This year has seen a number of organizations — public and private — back away from their previously open endorsements of Pride Month celebrations. The Utah Transit Authority will not participate in this year's Pride parade for the first time since 2022 as part of a temporary hold to ensure 'consistency and responsible stewardship of public funds,' according to a UTA spokesperson. Likewise, the University of Utah has discontinued its official sponsorship of the downtown Salt Lake City Pride celebration, which it had supported for 'several years,' according to a university spokesperson. The university will still encourage students to join its entry in the parade and continues to hold a 'Pride Week' every spring while students are on campus, featuring a fundraising 'gayla' and 'Drag Bingo.' These changes in Pride participation follow a series of steps taken by state lawmakers to restrict some transgender treatments for minors, prevent exclusionary DEI practices at government entities and prohibit most flags in public schools. But they also come amid what some are proclaiming a 'vibe shift‚" or cultural realignment away from socially liberal stances. After years of touting their support of Pride, corporations like Comcast, Anheuser-Busch and Nissan have pulled funding from Pride festivals across the country; organizations like Target have swapped rainbow decorations for American flags; and the Trump administration has officially declared June 'Title IX Month.' 'There's a massive vibe shift,' anti-DEI activist Robby Starbuck told the Deseret News. 'The public-facing things they used to do like Pride logos on their social media, or company-wide emails are no longer happening.' Policy changes like this can be attributed to a backlash among Americans, many of them parents, who believe 'symbols matter' when it comes to the places they will spend their money, according to Starbuck. But, he acknowledged, it is also the result of partisan activism, like his own, that verbally attacks, shames and boycotts organizations for taking a public position on an increasingly politicized issue. This year Starbuck has mobilized a group of supporters to film Pride parades around the country to document 'inappropriate behavior that occurs in view of children' and then to link the events to the companies sponsoring them. 'What you tolerate, in many ways, becomes who you are,' Starbuck said. 'However you bring about that change to bring something positive to the forefront, I don't think that really matters.' One state lawmaker, Rep. Trevor Lee, R-Layton, has drafted a bill for next session that would wield state power to discourage private organizations from announcing support of messages like Pride Month if they receive public subsidies. Lee, the primary sponsor of the 2024 law banning political flags in classrooms and on government flagpoles, told the Deseret News the bill in its current form would make taxpayer dollars in public-private partnerships contingent on organizations remaining politically neutral. Lee teased the legislation during a social media spat over the weekend where he criticized Pride Month posts from the Utah Jazz and Utah Mammoth — both owned by Smith Entertainment Group which is set to receive nearly $1 billion in public funds to revitalize parts of downtown. 'This isn't necessarily about Pride,' Lee said. 'It's about political neutrality.' Marina Lowe, the policy director of one of Utah's largest LGBTQ advocacy organizations, Equality Utah, slammed Lee's proposal as 'unAmerican' and 'anti-conservative,' arguing that it violates the First Amendment by telling private businesses what speech they can use. From her point of view, Pride Month and the rainbow flag shouldn't be considered political in the first place; they represent 'a celebration of love, community, getting to be oneself authentically,' Lowe said. What the so-called 'vibe shift' really shows, whether it be in statements from public officials or support from corporations, is how intense polarization, which stirs outrage across the political spectrum, has chilled free expression, Lowe said. 'That is sort of the world that we're living in right now, that it's impossible to take positions on things without that being weaponized against one side or the other,' Lowe said. 'We do need to get to a better place of healthy pluralism, where we all can coexist and work together, despite the fact that we have differences and differences of opinions about topics.' On Friday, standing in front of the City and County Building, Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall launched Pride Month by raising a Progress Pride Flag imprinted with the city's logo. A month earlier, the altered version of Salt Lake City's flag was officially adopted in a successful move to skirt the Legislature's new law prohibiting local governments from flying most flags. In her speech, Mendenhall said the 'new Sego Belonging Flag' celebrates 'the diversity of the LGBTQ community' and 'does not exclude others.' However, several conservative constituents took to social media to express anger that the city would continue to promote a message that many Utahns feel conflicts with their deeply held beliefs about family, identity and sexuality. One Utah leader, who understands both sides of the Pride Month debate, said there is a way for all Utahns, regardless of whether 'Pride' encourages or offends them, to be intentional about reaching out to others. The Rev. Marian Edmonds-Allen is a gay pastor based in Ogden who directs a group called Parity, an international nonprofit that works to heal 'LGBT and faith divides,' and who played a significant role in shaping Utah's 2015 'Utah Compromise,' that balanced LGBTQ anti-discrimination protections with religious freedom rights. More recently, her organization completed a pilot program with students and faculty from Brigham Young University called 'Faith, Hope, and Love' that aims to help religious individuals 'stand strong in their faith and convictions while maintaining a posture of compassion and grace in relationship with LGBT individuals.' 'Often someone knows a person who is LGBT, either at their workplace or in their family or their neighborhood, it's a wonderful time to say, 'Thinking of you and your family,'' the Rev. Edmonds-Allen said. 'It doesn't need to mention Pride or LGBT, but just being friendly to someone.' In her experience, Utah has been 'a shining light' in demonstrating what the Rev. Edmonds-Allen calls 'covenantal pluralism,' the idea that people of faith can hold firm to their religious beliefs while still being able to interact with someone who believes differently. Far from being a softening of one's beliefs, the Rev. Edmonds-Allen views this intentional cultivation of pluralism as 'a fundamental principle of Christianity.' It is also one of the core 'responsibilities of citizenship,' according to BYU's Paul Edwards. As the excesses of DEI have elicited an equally 'dogmatic' response in the opposite direction, Edwards believes it is more important than ever for Americans 'to try to understand our fellow citizens.' 'There's just too many sharp elbows out there right now and hurtful words,' Edwards said. 'We all love this great state and this great country, and let's find ways to honor that and not be seeking for ways to be offended by a word or a flag.'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
New Utah Fits All administrator to rerun applications after finding inconsistencies
Students work in a math class at Wasatch Junior High School in Salt Lake City on Tuesday, March 12, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) The administration change of Utah Fits All, the state's school choice program has hit some road bumps. Days after the Utah State Board of Education switched managers to run the program and the application portal closed, families are learning that they may have to apply again. Odyssey, a New York-based technology company that won the bid in May to run the voucher program, announced Friday on its website that after reviewing the application data the outgoing administrator provided, it found that in many cases the information was incomplete, inconsistent, or lacked proper verification. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The company 'will need to take additional steps to ensure accuracy, consistency, and compliance with the Utah Fits All law,' Odyssey officials wrote. They said those actions include re-running applications for families participating in the second year application cycle. 'We understand that this may be frustrating, but we believe this is the best path forward to determine eligibility accurately,' company officials said. The announcement comes after the Board of Education canceled early its multiyear contract with the program's previous third-party manager ACE Scholarships, citing 'convenience' reasons. The move was made possible by a 2025 bill that, among other changes to Utah Fits All, opened the door for a switch should the Board of Education need to change its current program administrator. Utah Board of Education ends contract early with Utah Fits All administrator Odyssey officials said ACE Scholarships' previous records make it impossible to determine students' eligibility since those records only show a small percentage of second year applicants successfully completed their income verification — a step on their application that's required by law. Those eligibility determinations will be delayed past the initial May 31 deadline, according to Odyssey. However, the company hasn't set a new timeline for the new process. Reconciling scholarship balances for current Utah Fits All participants is also underway, with 'a large population for whom Odyssey cannot determine their current balance because there are thousands of pending reimbursements, receipts, and transactions, many of which were received by Odyssey as recently as May 29th.' The company won't authorize any additional spending until pending purchases undergo further analysis, according to its website. As of Thursday, Utah Fits All's website listed June 30 as the last day to use 2024-2025 funds. Among the changes to Utah Fits All the Legislature approved this year is a 20% cap on extracurricular activities and physical education, in addition to tightened expense guidelines to explicitly prohibit the use of scholarship money to pay for ski passes, furniture, musical instruments, apparel, and other uses. While lawmakers approved more money to fund additional scholarships, bringing the total annual allocation for the program to $100 million, they also voted to reduce the amount some students could receive. This year, homeschooled children of ages 5 to 11 would have access to $4,000 a year, while those aged 12 to 18 years old could get up to $6,000. That's down from the $8,000 that was allowed during the program's first year. Private school students are still eligible for $8,000 a year to help cover their tuition or other expenses. Meanwhile, Utah Fits Alls is also facing other challenges that may threaten its existence. A 3rd District Court judge recently ruled the program to be unconstitutional, a win for the Utah Education Association, the state's largest teacher union. The union sued the state for diverting 'funds from already underfunded public schools,' union leaders said. They alleged the program violates the Utah Constitution, which explicitly says income tax revenue should be used to fund public education, among a few other limited uses. State leaders said they will appeal the decision to the Utah Supreme Court. While the case plays out in court, the program will continue to operate. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Utah attorneys sanctioned by appeals court for using AI to write legal brief
Two Utah attorneys were sanctioned after the Utah Court of Appeals found that they violated procedural rules for lawyers by citing cases that did not exist and appeared to have been created through artificial intelligence. The court's opinion says this is the first time Utah courts have addressed using AI when preparing legal documents. The judges said in the document that the use of reliable AI tools is not improper in itself, but the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure require attorneys to ensure their filings are accurate. 'The legal profession must be cautious of AI due to its tendency to hallucinate information. While technology continues to evolve, attorneys must verify each source,' the appellate judges said. Here, it said the attorneys 'fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar' when citing fake cases generated by ChatGPT. Richard Bednar and Douglas Durban, representing Matthew Garner, filed a petition asking the appellate court to review a decision of the 3rd District Court. When the attorneys on the other side of the dispute responded, they found the petition cited multiple cases that either didn't exist or were not applicable. In response, those attorneys stated that it appeared the petition could be AI-generated and cited at least one case they could only find by searching ChatGPT. They also stated that the petition contained references that were 'wholly unrelated' to the case. Bednar, who filed and signed the petition, was ordered not only to pay the opposing party's attorneys' fees for the time spent responding to a petition that included AI, but to refund his own client any fees associated with his filing of the petition. He was also ordered to pay $1,000 to "and Justice for all" a Utah nonprofit that works to provide equal access to justice and courts for Utahns. The Court of Appeals stated that it reviewed sanctions in other legal jurisdictions for attorneys citing 'hallucinated authority,' and believes the sanctions are appropriate. A hearing was scheduled for April 22 to give the attorneys the chance to argue why they should not be sanctioned. In a request to amend their petition filed before the hearing, Bednar and Durbano apologized for the errors and offered to pay the other party's attorneys' fees associated with their response. At the hearing, an attorney representing Bednar and Durbano explained that it was a law clerk who used ChatGPT to create the document, not Bednar; however, Bednar mistakenly trusted that someone else had checked the citations. The attorney said Bednar does take responsibility, although he was unaware that ChatGPT was being used until after the opposing attorneys brought it to his attention. He said his clients would voluntarily pay the opposing attorneys' fees to cover their efforts to respond to the petition. In their May 22 ruling, Utah's appellate judges stated that they appreciate the attorneys' acceptance of responsibility, but the lack of care is still an abuse of the justice system and caused harm. The opinion noted that other attorneys had to spend extra resources to research and judges were required to address this issue instead of other pending cases. The opinion further states that opposing counsel and Utah's courts cannot be responsible for independently verifying the validity of each citation. 'This court takes the submission of fake precedent seriously,' it said. 'Our system of justice must be able to rely on attorneys complying with their duty.' The case that included the first instance of AI use in Utah courts is a contract case filed by Matthew Garner against Kadince, a software company in North Ogden. He was a shareholder and employee at the company beginning in January 2016, when he was named chief experience officer. In his complaint, Garner claims that in December 2019, when he owned 30% of the company's shares, he was told that he would have to relinquish the majority of his shares or his employment would be terminated. He did relinquish the shares but later realized the employees who had threatened him were breaching his employment agreement by threatening to end his employment without giving him three formal written warnings, according to the complaint. He filed the lawsuit in February 2020. Kadince denied Garner's claims, asked for his lawsuit to be dismissed and claimed that he breached his contract with them by filing the lawsuit. Ultimately, the appellate judges denied both Garner's petition for appeal of a discovery issue and attorney fees order — the petition that included inaccurate citations — and his attorneys' request to allow them to file a new petition. The case will continue as if the appeal had not been filed.
