Can a Rental Agreement Include a Mandatory Charitable Donation

[LandSurveyor]

The "MID" is the metropolitan improvement district.

If you have ever been to Seattle and walked from, say, the Sheraton to the Pike Place Market, you understand fairly quickly about the reasons for the existence of the MID, namely:

The homeless who live in the area.
The alcoholism of the above and others wandering about.
Very aggressive panhandling.
Public urination.
Violent attacks of pedestrians by the mentally ill on an apparently random basis (dealt with as recently as July 31 in a letter to the Mayor from the MID).
A lack of city commitment to deal with any of the above.

These all still exist but have been reduced since the creation of the MID in 2004.

So how is the MID financed? No one seems to know for sure. There has never been any disclosure on their website. I think that the OP has a right to know, regardless of how much "good" is done by the MID. They make no statements that contributions are tax deductible. So much for a "write off".

It is not uncommon for lease agreements to provide an escalation in the event of a property tax increase on the landlord. I am not seeing that here.

So we are back to the original question from the OP:

Is this an enforceable clause?

I don't see anything enforceable about it, and the way it has been presented to the OP begs the question of whether he has already contributed to the MID from one or more of it's supporters, including his taxing district. At the core it is a legal question, and has nothing to do with those who would scold the OP from religious, moral, ethical, or other assumed positions ignoring the law. It is a law forum.

The MID seems to just be plastering over the problems inherent in the city government, which solutions should already be paid for through taxes.

I would refuse to pay it and see what happens.

[Mr. Knowitall]

I don't see anything enforceable about it, and the way it has been presented to the OP begs the question of whether he has already contributed to the MID from one or more of it's supporters, including his taxing district. At the core it is a legal question, and has nothing to do with those who would scold the OP from religious, moral, ethical, or other assumed positions ignoring the law. It is a law forum.

You've seen the actual clause?

Until you see the clause, whatever the justification for raising the rent, there's no basis to say that the clause is not enforceable. For all we know the lease isn't even going to mention a charitable donation.

[LandSurveyor]

You've seen the actual clause?

Yes, many times in rental agreements. But this seems to be an entirely new question. We don't know if it is a property tax escalator or whatever it is intended to be. Therefore my advice to refuse payment and see what happens. The MID does not seem to have answers for you on the topic.

I have said that we have not seen the escalator clause it in this case. I have also never seen a mandatory charitable donation clause in a lease agreement. Until I see it in this case, it doesn't exist. If it doesn't exist, any questions about it's enforceability would be moot at this time. Until it exists, it's unenforceable.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Unless and until we see the actual lease language, it's rash to say "refuse payment and see what happens". Again, the final lease may not separate out a donation - it may simply recite an amount of rent.

There are many ways the lease could be drafted to encourage a donation, or make it financially foolish not to make a donation, without being even slightly improper. "If the tenant submits proof to the landlord of a donation of $40 to Charity X, the tenant's rent shall be reduced in the amount of $5 per month for the remainder of the lease term."

[LandSurveyor]

There are many ways the lease could be drafted to encourage a donation, or make it financially foolish not to make a donation, without being even slightly improper. "If the tenant submits proof to the landlord of a donation of $40 to Charity X, the tenant's rent shall be reduced in the amount of $5 per month for the remainder of the lease term."

Certainly. When we see that language from the OP we can deal with it. Until then, nothing enforceable has been presented that I can see. It seems that he has only received a "note" along with his statement from the landlord requesting an additional monthly payment, and the question remains, is he required to pay it?