This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Advocates of SB175 say the bill would hold housing authorities more accountable for how they interact with landlords, but those who oppose the bill fear it would increase homelessness and discrimination.

Sen. Margaret Dayton, R-Orem, sponsor of the legislation, said allowing landlords to opt out of participating in a federal program that provides assistance to low-income residents will serve landlords who are frustrated with housing authorities that have withheld payments for "arbitrary" reasons.

Kirk Cullimore, a former president of the Utah Apartment Association and an attorney who represents many apartment owners, gave a few examples of housing authorities who, in his opinion, unfairly withheld rent from landlords. He told the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee on Friday that without an appeals process, landlords have suffered financially.

He also blamed tenants for some of the "deficiencies" cited by housing authorities.

"Ultimately this bill is just about choice," Cullimore said. "If it's a great program, [landlords] are going to participate."

But community members, like Stephanie Willmore with the Mountainland Continuum of Care, had concerns that the bill creates a "blanket policy" instead of finding a way to air grievances with specific housing authorities. The way SB175 is written, "ultimately the citizens are going to suffer," she said.

Zachary Bale, with the Housing Authority of Salt Lake County, warned against exacerbating the housing shortage for low-income individuals.

The current wait for obtaining a voucher under Section 8 is five years, he said, and even after that, between 6 and 9 percent of those with vouchers can't find housing and end up homeless.

Two single mothers who currently hold vouchers and are fighting to rise from poverty testified about their experiences, expressing a position "emphatically against this bill."

Supporters of the bill claimed it would open up more housing.

"Many of the landlords that control and operate those properties are trying so hard to legally and lawfully avoid working with Section 8 that they do things that hurt everybody," said Paul Smith, director of the Utah Apartment Association. He said landlords sometimes raise standards for residents so they won't have to take in those who qualify under Section 8.

He added that most of the people who can't find housing are in that situation because of their own choices and history.

Andrew Riggle, who spoke on behalf of the Disability Law Center, said he feared that this bill would significantly increase discrimination against the people protected under Section 8, noting that the federal legislation is intended to ensure diversity and prevent ghettoization.

"The word 'choice' is important. The apartment association brought it to the floor and said that landlords should have the choice, and that for them this issue is about choice," he said, "but the program is intended to provide tenants with choice."

Despite arguments from the public, the committee voted 3-0 (with three members absent) to recommend the bill, which will go on to the full Senate.