Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Eviction No Cause topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House panel hears hours of testimony on bill to allow landlords to end tenancies without cause
Summary
Representative Bob Lynn, the bill’s sponsor, told a House committee his bill would restore ordinary contract expectations by allowing landlords to end tenancies at lease expiration with written notice.
Representative Bob Lynn, the prime sponsor, told the House Committee on Housing that HB 60 would make a yearlong lease mean what it says and allow landlords a path to end tenancies at lease expiration.
"This is a bill that basically, I mean, we could if we had to label this, we could label it, I suppose, a contract means what it says, Bill," Representative Bob Lynn said, describing a court decision he said has treated tenants as effectively "there for life" once a lease has been entered.
Supporters, including property‑management representatives and the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, said the change would give landlords clarity and reduce the risk that small, "mom-and-pop" owners stop offering rental units because they fear being locked into tenancies they cannot end. Nick Norman, a housing provider who testified, said evictions are expensive and undesirable for landlords, but that the current court landscape makes some problem tenants effectively impossible to remove.
Opponents — including tenant advocates, aging and disability organizations, homelessness service providers and dozens of public commentators — urged lawmakers to oppose the bill. Testimony from Manchester renter Victoria Markowitz described the difficulty of finding a unit: "It took me 4 months to find that apartment," she told the committee, saying she fears losing housing if a landlord chooses not to renew her lease. Senator Tara Reardon, who said she represented landlords as an attorney earlier in her career, warned the committee the state is in a housing crisis and predicted evictions without cause would increase homelessness for vulnerable residents.
Public testimony included detailed statistics and lived experience: the vacancy rate cited by witnesses ranged around 0.6–0.8 percent; speakers described high cost burdens for low‑income and older renters and rising eviction filings. Multiple witnesses said landlords already have legal routes to remove tenants for nonpayment, nuisance, or other good cause, and that the state’s current statutes and court process target those situations.
Committee members questioned details such as the bill’s 60‑day notice period and whether the proposal would require a court record of eviction for end‑of‑lease removals. Representative Lynn told the committee early drafts included other notice terms and that he had discussed alternatives with attorneys from legal aid but he framed the measure as returning to “contract means what it says.”
No formal vote occurred during the hearing. The committee heard hours of testimony from landlords, tenant advocates, housing providers, municipal officials and residents. Lawmakers asked detailed follow‑up questions about eviction timelines, administrative costs, and how the bill would interact with existing statutes.
Next steps: the committee did not take an immediate vote. Lawmakers signaled close interest and asked for follow‑up materials from several witnesses. Some members later moved a separate study and amendment process on other housing legislation at the meeting.
