5
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 74434-8-1/6
a variety of circumstances. There is just cause for eviction to allow an owner or
his or her family to occupy the property. SMC 22.206.160(C)(1)(e). There is also
just cause for an eviction if an owner seeks to do substantial rehabilitation or
demolish the rental property, but only if the owner obtains a tenant relocation
license that assists low-income tenants displaced by development. SMC
22.206.160(C)(1)(h)(i); SMC 22.210.020(B). The "elects to sell" just cause
provision allows an owner to place a rental home on the market without a tenant
in place. Former SMC 22.206.160(C)(1)(f). However, there is no just cause to
evict simply because a new owner acquires the property.
We harmonize related provisions in a statute whenever possible. Davis v.
Cox, 183 Wn.2d 269, 283, 351 P.3d 862 (2015) (citing State v. Hirschfelder, 170
Wn.2d 536, 543, 242 P.3d 876 (2010)). The Owner argues that SMC
22.206.160(C)(1)(f)(2) is inconsistent with an interpretation of "elects to sell" that
requires the tenant to have vacated the property before an owner makes
reasonable attempts to sell it. That section creates a rebuttable presumption that
the owner did not intend to sell the property if:
Within 90 days after the date the tenant vacated or the date
the property was listed for sale, whichever is later, the owner
withdraws the rental unit from the market, rents the unit to
someone other than the former tenant, or otherwise indicates
that the owner does not intend to sell the unit[.]
The Owner argues that if an owner cannot make any attempts to sell until the
tenant has vacated the property, then the provision would be meaningless