Don't know the answer but my guess is probably "no go" on that criteria. Sounds like that is exactly what that law was passed to eliminate.

The best bet is to rely on other criteria for denial. For example, I have yet to find a Section 8 recipient with stellar credit, positive current and past land lord references, and a clean background.

The second best bet is the typical bureaucratic lack of hustle. In my area, it takes about 6 - 8 weeks from the time I first get the call of an interested voucher holder to the time they finish the inspection and commit to the lease. Delays due to overworked inspectors and just general lack of motivation. Since my typical vacancy is filled in less than a week, by the time the voucher holder calls back to schedule the inspection I usually have it rented already. I call this the "you snooze, you lose" criteria. To my knowledge, there is no law that says I must wait and receive no rent while they piddle around.

The third best bet is that your unit doesn't qualify for Section 8. Some areas might try to FORCE you to make it comply. Okay...so sometimes it takes a while to get those things repaired. Meanwhile, find a market rate tenant who doesn't care that one room has no storm screens.

Fourth best bet is sell and move to a state that still recognizes the rights of property owners.

I verify income, not employment. Get it?

NE, I hear you, but in states that have income discrimination laws, Section 8 IS counted as income. Even though it never directly ends up in the hands of the client. I know...silly, isn't it?

What might be interesting to research is if you can have criteria for the LENGTH of income. For example, my criteria says the income must be from a documented source and must be stable for a minimum of 1 year, or if a new job then the income must be at least 90 days and the past job must have been for a minimum of 1 year in a related career field. This is to protect me from job hoppers who get hired and fired in those first 90 days. Dunno. Might work. Might not. I prefer not to tangle with source of income. I just use the 4 strategies above. Thankfully, MO doesn't have source of income as a protected class. Still, I tread cautiously knowing there are always other clear areas I can deny based on. This would certainly exclude new voucher holders, if it would fly.

It's interesting we have to come up with tricks and tactics to make what are basically wise business decisions, isn't it? Lawmakers claim that Section 8 is just like any other income, but in fact it isn't. There is no way to garnishee Section 8 if the deal goes south, and there are a host of reasons that the "guaranteed" money can turn off. Kids move out (reduces voucher $), client gets busted for a crime, Govt fails to pass a budget (happens frequently), sequestration of funds, "haircuts" of subsidized rents, etc. True, someone can get fired from a job and lose income too, but odds are they'll get another job somewhere down the road. People who aren't on subsidies have no choice: no work = no income = no food. Whereas who knows if once someone gets on the dole if they'll ever have garnisheable income/assets.

The law in MA relates to the source of income, not the amount. You cannot discriminate on the basis of public assistance (e.g., Section 8), but you can still require a certain amount of income.

The best way I have found to look for tenants is to advertise to the--employers! I send my colored picture fliers to the personnel departments of all the likely businesses, factories, schools, clinics, hospitals, etc, so they can be posted on their bulletin boards or websites. I have had responses from city workers, telephone employees, hosp techs, etc. If you are getting responses from people who WORK, you don't have to worry about Sec-8.

People who work continuously (no matter what level) will have better histories, better credit, and less drama. Usually they will have behaviors that get along with others, have a sense of doing things on time, and in general have more discipline and be responsible about money matters. If your focus is on working-salary instead of income you get people who have learned better behaviors, and they are the better tenants. A LL needs MORE than just the rent, he/she needs balanced, disciplined, well behaved people, along with that rent. That is my experience, & the way I pick tenants. I don't take the first one that meets the minimum qualifications--I pick the one best qualified for my criteria and my business.

I do discriminate against the ratio of "Income" and "Debt". Not the source of income, so long as it's legal earned.

Many times a person living off of Government Subsidies can't meet my 3-Times rule. They often think they are in a "Special Class" that excludes them from any "landlord rules". They are not!