Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Eviction Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manchester aldermen decline to take immediate position on HB 60 after public comments
Summary
Residents and local advocates urged the Board of Mayor and Aldermen to oppose HB 60, a state bill they said would allow no‑cause evictions; the board heard testimony but did not adopt a formal position and asked staff to compile information for further consideration.
The Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen heard several public comments urging the city to oppose House Bill 60, which speakers said would allow landlords to end tenancies without cause when a lease expires. Advocates told the board the change would worsen housing insecurity in Manchester and increase demand on local welfare services.
Why it matters: Speakers said HB 60 would remove a long‑standing tenant protection and make it easier for landlords to displace renters, likely raising homelessness and straining city services. Board members said they wanted more information before taking a formal position and agreed to gather and circulate the bill text and related materials.
Multiple callers described tight rental markets and financial strain for low‑ and moderate‑income renters. “Eviction without cause makes it easier to hide ill intent, and it puts our most vulnerable citizens at the greatest risk,” said Maddie August, a Manchester resident. Viola Katsime, identified in testimony as deputy director of the Granite State Organizing Project, said the bill “would increase homelessness” and urged the board to take a public stand in opposition.
Alderman Sapienza moved that the board publicly oppose HB 60; a second was recorded, but after discussion the board did not adopt the motion. Board members debated next steps and agreed staff would compile the bill language, committee assignment and background materials for distribution to aldermen ahead of a future discussion. Alderman Barrett and others recommended soliciting viewpoints from both supporters and opponents of the legislation before deciding whether to send a letter of opposition or support.
Several aldermen suggested reviving a process the city used in prior administrations to review state legislation and to invite department heads and state representatives to brief the board. Mayor Ruais (as addressed during public comment) and aldermen indicated willingness to reconvene interested members to review HB 60 and related testimony before any formal city position is adopted.
Ending: Members of the public who addressed HB 60 were told how to file comments with the state legislature online; the board directed staff to return with the bill language and committee information for further consideration at a subsequent meeting.
