Lawmakers weigh criminalization, police role vs. eviction process for unauthorized occupants

A contentious portion of the hearing centered on a proposal to allow police intervention when an occupant in a residence is labeled "unauthorized" or "unlawful," rather than relying solely on the civil eviction (summary process) system. Testimony exposed a sharp divide between landlords who face costly, slow evictions and legal advocates who caution against turning civil landlord-tenant matters into criminal police enforcement.

Landlords and a state marshal told lawmakers of scenarios where people occupy vacant or re-possessed properties without permission and described lengthy, costly efforts to remove them through the courts. State Marshal Brian Mezick observed that enforcement of court orders is difficult and that some cases "lend to many shades of gray," asking the committee to consider the practical burdens on owners who cannot use self-help.

Connecticut Legal Services' Raphael (Rafi) Podolsky and others opposed criminalizing broader categories of unauthorized occupancy. Podolsky warned that HB 6338 "effectively encourages the use of police in a larger number of instances to dealing with cases that ought to be brought as ordinary evictions," and that police are not the appropriate body to adjudicate disputes that should be handled civilly with procedural protections and opportunities to raise defenses. Legal-aid witnesses said criminalization could incentivize lockouts and arrests without due process.

Marshals and landlord witnesses describe rare, clear-cut trespass or breaking-and-entering cases in which police currently can act, and they asked the committee to craft narrow language to capture true trespass situations (forced entry) rather than broadly criminalizing occupancy disputes between landlords and tenants or guests.…