Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rental Application Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House Judiciary hears bid to require refunds of unused rental application fees
Summary
House Bill 311 would require landlords or managers to refund portions of rental application fees not used to provide specified services; the hearing split proponents (students, housing advocates, tribes) who described rent-market burdens and opponents (landlord associations, property managers) who warned of screening costs and unintended consequences.
Representative Kelly Kortum opened House Bill 311 by saying many Montanans pay rental application fees yet do not get the rental and that "this must end." Kortum described the bill as allowing landlords or managers to retain only specified costs tied to services actually performed and requiring refund of the remainder.
Proponents included student and housing-advocacy groups and tribal representatives who said nonrefundable application fees impose a heavy burden on students, low-income renters and Native communities. Hope Morrison of the Associated Students of the University of Montana described paying multiple $25–$50 fees and urged the committee to ease that burden. Alissa Snow, speaking for several tribal communities, said limiting retained fees would lower barriers for Native applicants who are overrepresented among the unhoused.
Opponents — including the Montana Landlord Association and individual landlords — urged the committee not to pass a blanket rule, saying application fees often cover credit and criminal-background checks and third-party services. John Synrude of the Montana Landlord Association argued screening costs are real, warned of administrative burdens on small landlords, and suggested the licensing and oversight of property managers (Department of Labor & Industry) is the more fitting venue for regulation.
Committee members questioned whether the bill should carve out exceptions for verified third-party costs, whether it should apply only to licensed property managers, and how to avoid making small landlords bear disproportionate administrative burdens. Sponsor Kortum said the bill already allows retention of the actual documented cost for services performed, and suggested costs could be recovered in rent if needed.
The hearing closed after proponents and opponents exchanged technical details and possible amendments. No final vote was taken; members flagged implementation and scope issues (licensed property managers vs. mom-and-pop landlords) for possible changes ahead of executive action.
