Housing

This Act updates the procedures governing the transfer of a manufactured home located in a manufactured home community in order to provide a clearer process and reduce ambiguities that allowed some community owners to prevent the transfer of a lease or a home as well as prevent family members from inheriting the investment made by a deceased family member in a home. This Substitute differs from the original bill to make changes to reflect discussions among the stakeholders, including: - Moves the procedure for inspecting a home prior to transfer from the transfer section to the section that governs the rules for standards for retaining a transferred home in a community. - Creates a 2-step process for the sale or transfer of a home where the homeowner notifies the community owner prior to listing the home, at which time the community owner may conduct an inspection, and a second notification for the sale of the home which triggers the right of first refusal in which the community owner can then purchase the home. - Significantly reducing the time a buyer has to complete repairs. - Clarifies that the notice of non-renewal of a lease by a tenant 60 days prior to the end of a lease term is only for moving the home off of the lot, and selling of the home is governed by § 7013. - Clarifies requirements on lease transfers to heirs and adds limitations for how long the transfers take place depending on whether a previous occupant continues to live in the home after the death of the prior owner. - Clarifies the portions of the tenancy application that must be completed in different situations when a home is inherited. - Clarifies how long an estate has until appropriate action has to be taken. - Removed the requirement that a community owner purchase the home if the buyer’s tenancy application is denied. - Changes the minimum amount that a community owner must offer to a homeowner to prevent the ability of a lease to be transferred in the future to the greater of $1,500 or 36 months of the difference between the current monthly rent and market monthly rent. - Adds a requirement that a seller must disclose to a buyer information about the lease transfer and that a community owner must disclose the rental amount to a prospective buyer. - Makes it clear that a homeowner has to comply with § 7013(c) for the lease to transfer. - Removes a provision in § 7016 that would no longer apply under the changes to § 7013. - Extends the time that a community owner may purchase the ability to transfer the lease up to the time the homeowner provides notice of intent to sell.

This Act creates the Affordable Rental Housing Program (ARHP) within the Housing Development Fund. The ARHP is modeled on the federal Section 515 program and provides loans to increase the supply of affordable housing for families with very low-, low-, and moderate-incomes, individuals who are elderly, and individuals with disabilities.

This Joint Resolution directs the Delaware State Housing Authority to create a pilot program for the purpose of providing technical assistance related to zoning ordinance reform to local governments in Delaware. The goal of this pilot program is to help participating local governments identify and implement zoning practices that increase the supply of affordable housing and support goals such as equitable development and economic growth throughout this State. By giving local governments the technical assistance needed to modernize zoning ordinances, this pilot program will help Delaware close its affordable housing gap while allowing local governments the flexibility to adapt best practices to meet their jurisdictional needs. If successful, this pilot program will establish model policies for local government zoning ordinance reforms that can be expanded across this State.

This Act provides a pathway for former defendants in eviction actions to have the eviction filings against them shielded from public view. Being the subject of an eviction filing can prevent an individual from securing housing for years after any judgment in the case has been satisfied. Even tenants who prevailed in eviction actions may be denied housing by landlords who turn away any applicant with a prior eviction filing, regardless of the outcome of the case. The well-known health, social, and economic consequences of eviction can thus linger for years after an eviction filing, and trap individuals – including many children and families – in a cycle of poverty and housing instability. The effects are particularly acute among already marginalized groups, such as Black and female renters. By shielding eviction records when an individual has met certain requirements, this Act will help break down barriers to stable housing and economic security. Under this Act, the Court must grant shielding upon a motion by the defendant if the Court finds any of the following to be true: 1. The judgment against the defendant was a judgment on the merits, a default judgment, or a stipulated judgment, 5 or more years have passed since the judgment was entered, the defendant has satisfied any monetary award included in the judgment, and the defendant has had no other similar judgments within 5 years of the defendant’s motion to shield. 2. The parties resolved the action through a stipulated agreement, and the defendant has complied with the terms of the stipulated agreement. 3. The plaintiff withdrew the complaint. 4. The Court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint. 5. The final judgment was in favor of the defendant. 6. The plaintiff and the defendant have agreed to the shielding. 7. The shielding of the records is clearly in the interests of justice. The Court may not charge a filing fee for a motion to shield. Once the Court has granted the shielding, the Court has 45 days to effectuate it. An individual whose eviction record has been shielded can answer questions about prior evictions as if the shielded action was never filed. This Act is a second Substitute for Senate Bill No. 115. Like Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill No. 115, Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill No. 115 does the following: 1. Adds judgement by stipulation to the list of judgments for which shielding is available after 5 years if the defendant has satisfied any monetary award included in the judgment. 2. Creates exceptions that make the shielded records available to the Department of Justice and the defendant in the action. 3. Allows for records of shielded actions to be available to the public for purposes of preserving case law, provided that all identifying information is redacted or otherwise obscured. 4. Makes minor technical changes. The primary differences between Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill No. 115 and Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill No. 115 are as follows: 1. Senate Substitute No. 2 replaces the term “expungement” with the term “shielding” to better reflect how the Court will be handling records. 2. Senate Substitute No. 2 eliminates the provision in Senate Substitute No. 1 that would have allowed certain eviction records to be automatically shielded. 3. Senate Substitute No. 2 adds a requirement that a defendant seeking shielding under paragraph (a)(1) of § 5720 (lines 6 through 9) have no other similar judgments against them within 5 years of the motion to shield. Senate Substitute No 2. also adds language specifying that redacted records are being made available for purposes of preserving important case law, and that the Court is responsible only for databases and systems that it controls.

This Act is intended to supplement protections under federal law for members of the military, their families, and veterans by adding “military status” as a protected class for purposes of the State’s public accommodations, housing, insurance, education, and employment laws. Technical corrections are also made to existing statutory language to conform with the requirements of the Legislative Drafting Manual. This House Substitute No. 1 adds language to clarify that distinctions or differential treatment based on military status that are allowed by State law or regulation, federal law or regulation, or government contract, are not unfair or discriminatory practices. It also updates existing statutory language that was changed by 84 Del. Laws c 429.