Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landlord Tenant Inspections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends ‘do not pass’ on landlord-tenant move‑out inspection bill after landlord testimony
Summary
The Industry, Business and Labor Committee voted to recommend a do‑not‑pass on bill 12 72 as amended after testimony from a property manager who said the bill would shift burdens, increase litigation and reduce housing supply.
The Industry, Business and Labor Committee recommended a do‑not‑pass on bill 12 72 as amended following testimony and questions about how the bill would change the process for move‑out inspections and security‑deposit disputes.
Former state senator and Fargo property manager Jonathan Casper testified that the bill, which requires a meeting between landlords and tenants at lease termination and shifts certain burdens if one party does not attend, would create litigation over scheduling and attendance, lengthen unit turnover times and raise costs for renters by reducing available rental supply.
"If you can't schedule that meeting or get it done and get that thing rented by the first, that means it's going to sit empty for a month," Casper said, describing operations for management companies that turn many units each month. He warned the bill’s burden shifting could expose landlords to treble damages and more small‑claims litigation over whether a meeting occurred.
Casper said his company uses a detailed checklist at move‑out, provides tenants a written inventory and typically documents charges and sends itemized claims within the 30‑day statutory period. He told the committee that in practice managers negotiate with departing tenants and try to avoid court because court judgments can make it harder for residents to re‑rent.
Supporters of codifying a standardized inspection process argued the bill would clarify tenant and landlord rights at lease termination. Opponents, including Casper, said the state should not codify what he described as industry best practices and that the bill would produce unintended consequences in rural markets where turnover logistics are harder.
Representative Christie moved a do‑not‑pass recommendation; Representative Greenberg seconded. After roll call, the committee approved the do‑not‑pass recommendation.
The chair directed the clerk to record the committee’s action; the bill was returned without a positive recommendation.
