Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances rental-fee transparency bill with 'no recommendation' to allow further legal refinement
Summary
Senate Bill 267, a measure to require fee disclosure and limit certain up‑front housing-access charges, advanced from committee with a motion for 'do pass with no recommendation' after extensive debate and requests to refine technical language with stakeholders.
Senate Bill 267, aimed at increasing transparency for rental listings and limiting some up‑front move-in fees that advocates say are barriers to housing access, advanced from the Tax, Business and Transportation Committee on a 7–3 procedural vote handing the measure to the next step with no committee recommendation while sponsors continue negotiations with stakeholders.
Sponsor framed SB267 as focused on barriers that impede people — including those using housing vouchers — from completing multiple rental applications and securing housing. The measure would require owners to disclose upfront “all terms of a rental agreement,” itemize fees in listings and permit a single tenant screening report to be reused for multiple applications; it would cap tenant screening fees at $50 and limit late-payment fees to a percentage of the delinquent base rent. "This is a relatively easy solution to a large housing crisis," Rachel Biggs, chief strategy officer at Albuquerque Health Care for the Homeless, told the committee.
Supporters included homelessness-service providers, faith-based groups, tenant advocates and some landlords who said the bill levels the field. The Apartment Association and several property-management organizations urged changes, noting practical issues around receipt and verification of third-party screening reports, digital versus cash payments and the question of whether landlords could fold fees into rent instead. Opposition witnesses asked for clearer definitions of “fee,” the acceptable form and provenance of a tenant-provided screening report, and how the bill would operate in a digital marketplace.
Committee members asked for technical fixes and encouraged the sponsor to negotiate with industry attorneys and advocates. Chair put the bill to a procedural committee vote to send it forward without a recommendation to allow additional drafting in the next committee (Judiciary) and floor debate. The sponsor said she will pursue clarifying amendments before later committee consideration.
