Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Eviction Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers debate eviction reforms and proposed criminal-history grounds amid warnings of housing instability
Summary
Two related bills — HB1598 (eviction procedure changes) and HB1499 (expanded grounds tied to past convictions) — drew competing testimony from landlords and tenant advocates. Sponsors said the bills streamline RSA 540 to fix delays; opponents, including legal-aid and mental-health groups, warned the proposals could accelerate evictions and disproportionately harm vulnerable households.
Representative Dylan Dumont, sponsor of HB1598, opened the housing package by arguing the state's eviction process can be slow and that amended notice and pleading requirements will restore efficiency and fairness: "Non-payment of rent or significant lease violations ... create real hardship," he said.
Landlord advocates and housing-provider representatives described the bill package as a negotiated compromise that restores clear timelines and reduces opportunities to delay hearings. Nick Norman, an advocate for housing providers, and David Klene, a small landlord, urged the committee to preserve provisions that require tenants to state defenses early so landlords can prepare, noting drafting fixes remain.
Opponents delivered sustained warnings. Steve Tower of New Hampshire Legal Assistance said HB1499 (which would add certain past convictions and immigration offenses as eviction grounds) goes too far by permitting eviction for past events that do not reflect tenants' present behavior. "This would allow someone to be evicted for a past criminal status even if their conduct while living in the residence is not a threat," he said. Holly Stevens of NAMI New Hampshire underscored the public-health dimension, arguing that stable housing supports mental-health recovery and that faster evictions would exacerbate homelessness and hospital boarding.
The judicial branch noted potential fiscal and operational effects: Deputy General Counsel Lauren Warner said expedited eviction timelines shift resources and could delay other case types unless additional judges or staff are added; the branch estimated the administrative impact could range from $100,000 to $500,000 per year depending on caseload.
Supporters argued the amendments include safeguards — continuances when tenants are legitimately surprised by affirmative defenses, limited judicial discretion for emergency stays, and protections for pro se litigants — but acknowledged the compromise required close drafting. Committee members asked for clarification of citation errors, potential duplications and the balance between speed and due-process safeguards.
No final committee votes were recorded on these bills during the session; committee members asked staff to revisit language and to consider targeted changes such as limiting look-back periods or clarifying how households are treated when one occupant has a qualifying conviction.
