SB 643 would substantially change Oregon’s landlord-tenant laws for most residential rentals. The bill removes the current restrictions that generally require landlords to have cause, or a qualifying landlord reason, to end a month-to-month tenancy after the first year of occupancy. Under the bill, landlords could terminate month-to-month tenancies without stating a cause, and the bill also revises related notice provisions for fixed-term tenancies and certain manufactured dwelling park conversions. It further repeals ORS 90.324, which currently caps rent increases for many units, and replaces that framework with a rule allowing rent increases without the existing statutory limit.
The bill also amends rent-increase notice rules. For standard residential tenancies, landlords would still need to give 90 days’ written notice before a rent increase, but the bill would remove the current annual cap and percentage limit. For manufactured dwelling park and marina tenancies, the bill similarly removes the rent cap while retaining notice requirements and other tenant protections specific to those settings. SB 643 also updates eviction complaint forms and related cross-references so the statutory forms and citations match the new termination rules.
Impact
SB 643 would amend multiple sections of Oregon’s Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, including ORS 90.427, 90.323, 90.600, 90.643, 90.220, 105.124, and 456.267, and would repeal ORS 90.324. The practical effect would be to expand landlord discretion to end month-to-month tenancies and to eliminate statewide limits on rent increases for covered residential tenancies, while preserving notice requirements and some special rules for manufactured dwelling parks, marinas, and formerly publicly supported housing. It would also alter eviction pleading forms and related statutory references to reflect the new termination categories.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of committee testimony or recorded votes, the measure appears to be strongly landlord-favorable and tenant-unfriendly in its policy direction. The digest itself describes the bill as allowing landlords to end tenancies and raise rents without limit, which signals the bill’s intended effect. No recorded committee discussion or vote history is provided here, so there is no documented bipartisan or negotiated sentiment to report from the available materials.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be the elimination of just-cause protections for month-to-month tenants and the repeal of rent-increase limits. Tenant advocates would likely object to the loss of housing stability, increased displacement risk, and the ability of landlords to raise rents without a statutory cap. Landlord and property-owner supporters would likely argue that the bill restores flexibility in pricing and tenancy management. Additional tension may arise around the bill’s effects on manufactured dwelling park residents, marina tenants, and tenants in formerly publicly supported housing, where some protections remain but key rent and termination restrictions are relaxed.