Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At lengthy hearing, landlords warn bills on deposits, holdover fees and 'just cause' could chill construction; advocates call for right-to-counsel funding
Summary
Stakeholders debated multiple housing measures: industry witnesses warned that limits on security deposits and losing lapse-of-time as a remedy would reduce investment and new units; advocates pressed for tenant protections, right-to-counsel funding and nonresident landlord registration to hold absentee owners accountable.
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several other bills were discussed alongside HB 6889 and HB 6948.
Industry groups โ including the Connecticut Apartment Association, Home Builders Association, and individual housing providers โ opposed provisions in HB 6891 (limits on security deposits), HB 6943 (holdover/late-fee and ledger transparency measures) and certain changes to lapse-of-time rules, saying the combined effect would discourage investment and constrain the ability to manage risk. "This will drive down the incentive to develop and maintain housing," a CTA witness said, urging the committee to focus on increasing supply through permitting and incentives.
Tenant advocates and legal-aid lawyers supported bills to require landlords to provide account ledgers on request, restrict excessive holdover fees and require registration of nonresident (out-of-state) landlords to improve enforcement (SB 1303). Advocates said many tenants cannot access portals controlled by off-site managers and that ledger access is necessary to contest improper arrearage claims.
Right-to-counsel funding (HB 6947) and municipal penalties for code violations (SB 1305) were also raised: providers and tenants asked the state to increase funding for legal aid and to consider penalties and registration to hold absentee owners accountable for building-code failures.
Committee members indicated some appetite for technical fixes and for reconciling tenant-protection measures with incentives to encourage construction and maintenance, but no votes were taken.

