House committee debates new rules for landlord termination notices, remedies for bad-faith evictions
Loading...
Summary
The committee reviewed a redraft of bill 772 that would require landlords to cite specific reasons for terminating tenancies (sale/repurpose, family occupancy, major renovations) and, in many landlord-initiated cases, extend notice to 90 days; members pressed for remedies if landlords act in bad faith and asked counsel to tighten language.
Lawmakers in the House Committee on General & Housing continued redrafting bill 772 on Tuesday, focusing on when landlords may terminate tenancies and what recourse tenants should have if landlords misstate or abuse those reasons. Counsel said the draft would enumerate landlord-initiated grounds — including sale or repurposing, occupancy by an immediate family member, demolition or significant renovation — and generally set a 90-day notice period for those situations.
The chair told the committee he wanted landlords to be required to state which enumerated reason applied and proposed a civil remedy when a landlord acts in bad faith. "The remedy would be, well, then they have to pay a month's moving expenses. A month and a month's rent," the chair said, describing an example of the kind of consequence he had in mind if a landlord falsely claimed a reason and no such action occurred. Counsel cautioned that because the draft currently uses the same 90-day period across several landlord-initiated grounds, a landlord could simply use the no-cause subsection unless notice periods or penalties are differentiated.
Committee members also discussed tenant protections tied to renovations. Counsel noted the draft gives tenants a right of first refusal to reoccupy a unit "at market rate following the renovations." Members debated whether that right meaningfully protects tenants if landlords may raise rent after rehabbing units; counsel emphasized the provision as written preserves a tenant's opportunity to return but does not guarantee the previous rent level.
Several practical issues drew comment: the draft would align week-to-week tenancy termination language and counsel recommended changing the termination-notice minimum from 7 days to 10 days to match the nonpayment provision; the chair agreed to include 10 days in the next draft. The committee also discussed whether landlords should have additional incentives to end leases sooner (for example, shorter notice) and whether that would encourage misuse of the enumerated grounds.
The chair and counsel asked for targeted drafting changes for the next version: require landlords to state which enumerated ground applies, add clearer language defining bad-faith conduct and a remedy framework, and reconcile inconsistent notice lengths (including making week-to-week and nonpayment notice periods consistent). The committee did not vote on the provision and left the draft language to be revised for further consideration at the next session.
