Senate committee debates tenant screening rules after judiciary review of immigrant-status immunity

The Senate Economic Development, Housing & General Affairs Committee continued work on a housing bill that would add protections for renters and restrict how landlords screen applicants, with members debating a provision on immigration status and a separate change that would force landlords to accept one of three forms of identification if an applicant lacks a Social Security number.

Committee members said the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewed the draft and "generally supported" the additions but recommended language to avoid conflicts with federal law. The provision discussed would add two subsections to the bill's unfair housing practices section saying that if federal law requires verification of immigration status or allows taking immigration status into account for credit, doing so would not itself violate state law.

The committee heard from Angela Zaykowski, director of the Vermont Landlords Association, who said the proposed immigration-related language still leaves many landlords in a precarious position. "It creates this conflict between state law and federal law and or federal actions that could have our housing providers caught sort of in the crosshairs," Zaykowski said. She warned that landlords, facing uncertainty about federal enforcement, might be reluctant to offer new rental units or ADUs because "the more uncertainty that is imposed into this relationship ... the less likely people are to make that ADU unit, to put another unit online." (Angela Zaykowski, director, Vermont Landlords Association)

The committee also turned to the bill's Section 11, which would address Social Security numbers on rental applications. Under the draft discussed in committee, a landlord could request one of three identifiers to run background or credit checks: a Social Security number, an individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN), or an unexpired government-issued identification. Committee counsel explained the change was intended so applicants without Social Security numbers would not be automatically excluded from housing applications.

Cameron Wood of the Office of Legislative Counsel explained the operative approach: "It would require landlords to take one of three pieces of information ... they couldn't mandate that it'd be a Social Security number." He walked members through draft 3.1 and identified the bill's additions at section 14 in that draft. (Cameron Wood, Office of Legislative Counsel)

Angela Zaykowski told the committee that, in her experience, credit checks and many screening vendors rely on Social Security numbers or ITINs to produce accurate credit reports. "The only way to get a accurate credit report is with someone's Social Security number or taxpayer identification number," she said, adding that relying on name and address alone often produces inaccurate results.

Representatives of housing providers who testified later said some screening vendors can produce usable reports without a Social Security number, and that landlords often use systems where applicants enter a Social Security number but the landlord receives only a masked identifier and the screening results.

Committee members discussed drafting changes to Section 11 to clarify that if a landlord requires a background or credit check and an applicant does not have a Social Security number, the landlord must accept an ITIN or an unexpired government ID; members also discussed removing a proposed requirement that rental applications explicitly state the three acceptable forms of identification.

No formal vote was taken on the committee floor during the session; staff were directed to draft alternative language for the next version of the bill. The committee chair said a revised draft would be prepared for the committee's next consideration.

Why it matters: The provisions would change landlord screening practices statewide and touch on federal-state tension over immigration law, credit-reporting practices, and housing access for students and people without Social Security numbers. Committee legal staff and stakeholders acknowledged unresolved questions about whether consumer-reporting systems can reliably produce credit reports without a Social Security number and whether ITINs are universally available to all immigration statuses.

What comes next: Committee counsel said he would draft the revised language and bring it back before the committee before finalizing the bill for committee report. The committee also flagged that the bill must be reconciled with other provisions (for example, a project-based tax-increment provision currently in Ways and Means) before final reporting.

Speakers quoted or cited in this report: Angela Zaykowski, director, Vermont Landlords Association (testimony on landlord screening and immigration-related concerns). Cameron Wood, Office of Legislative Counsel (explanation of draft language and placement in draft 3.1). Chris Donnelly, Champlain Housing Trust (testimony on practice and experience with screening platforms).

Discussion vs. decision Discussion points: concerns about federal preemption and landlord liability; practical ability of landlords to run credit checks without Social Security numbers; whether to require a disclosure on application forms. Direction/assignment: staff counsel to draft revised language clarifying that if a landlord requires a background or credit check and an applicant lacks a Social Security number, the landlord must accept an ITIN or unexpired government-issued identification; committee counsel to prepare revised draft 3.2 for the next meeting. Decisions: none taken in the session (no formal motions or roll-call votes).

Authorities referenced: federal Fair Housing Act (federal law referenced by multiple speakers); H.169 (bill number referenced as the original House bill); Reyes v. Waple's Mobile Home Park (federal appellate case discussed as recent guidance on asking about immigration status).

Proper names referenced: Vermont Landlords Association; Office of Legislative Counsel; AppFolio (tenant-screening platform); Champlain Housing Trust; H.169; Reyes v. Waple's Mobile Home Park.

Clarifying details extracted from the record: the draft would require landlords to accept one of three identifiers (Social Security number, ITIN, or unexpired government-issued ID) when an applicant lacks a Social Security number; the provision discussing federal preemption was placed in subsections d and e of the unfair housing sections (identified by the committee as section 14 of draft 3.1 in committee paperwork); witnesses reported common landlord practice to run credit/background checks and use masked SSNs in reporting systems; ITIN availability across immigration statuses was reported as unclear by counsel and witnesses; committee counsel agreed to reword subsection B1 so that the alternate identifiers are required only "if an applicant does not have a Social Security number."