|
House Bill 2803 |
House Author: Thompson, Senfronia et al. |
|
Effective: Vetoed |
Senate Sponsor: Huffman |
House Bill 2803 amends the Property Code to establish that the landlord of a multiunit commercial property is in breach of a lease with a tenant if the tenant reasonably believes that another tenant in the same multiunit commercial property is engaging in an unlawful activity as defined by the bill, the complaining tenant takes specified steps to report the activity, and the landlord does not file a forcible detainer suit against the offending tenant by a certain deadline. If the landlord is in breach of the tenant's lease on such grounds, the tenant may terminate their rights and obligations under the lease, vacate the leased premises, and avoid liability for future rent and any applicable sums due under the lease. For purposes of these provisions, "unlawful activity" means certain prostitution offenses, trafficking of persons, or operating, maintaining, or advertising a massage establishment that is not compliant with applicable state law or local ordinances relating to the licensing or regulation of massage establishments.
House Bill 2803 establishes that a commercial tenant's right of possession terminates and the landlord has a right to repossess the leased premises if the tenant is using or allowing the use of those premises to operate, maintain, or advertise a massage establishment that is not compliant with applicable state law or local ordinances relating to the licensing or regulation of massage establishments.
Governor's Reason for Veto: "House Bill 2803 seeks to prevent human trafficking, an aim I whole‑heartedly share and applaud the author and sponsor for advancing. I have fought against human trafficking throughout my service as Attorney General and Governor. But House Bill 2803 goes about it in the wrong way, pitting tenants against other tenants and landlords, and drawing in basic licensing rules that are unrelated to trafficking. Texas law already allows a landlord to seek forcible eviction upon a reasonable belief that a tenant is engaging in prostitution or human trafficking on the premises. Under House Bill 2803, however, one tenant could have another tenant dragged into court just by making an accusation to the landlord, of something as mundane as sloppy recordkeeping by a massage establishment. That is no basis for governmental interference with a private contract between the landlord and the finger‑pointing tenant. And the landlord is caught in the middle, practically forced to file against an allegedly offending tenant to avoid the severe, artificial consequences from inaction. The bill would be ripe for abuse by a disgruntled tenant looking for a way to break the lease or harass the neighbors.
The unforeseen negative consequences of this bill could be substantial, with no potential remedy until some future legislative session would be able to fix the flaws in the statute. But even then, there is never any certainty that a proposed bill would pass. The better strategy is to prepare a more narrowly tailored bill to achieve the end sought while avoiding the potential adverse consequences."