Committee advances 'Fair Chance in Housing' bill after debate over conviction look-back period

The Economic Matters Committee on Thursday advanced Senate Bill 937, the Maryland Fair Chance in Housing Act, after members debated how the bill treats a prospective tenant’s conviction and when the look-back period should begin.

Sponsor remarks laid out the bill’s core framework: landlords must generally provide a conditional offer before conducting a criminal-history check and the bill establishes procedures for how convictions are considered. Committee amendments removed a provision that would have classified violations as an unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice, permitted consideration of certain out-of-state convictions comparable to Maryland offenses, and struck a requirement that the Office of Tenant and Landlord Affairs collect specified complaint data.

Delegate Adams, who offered an amendment, said the change was intended to make the statute fairer for individuals who served time: “there’s a conviction and then there’s a time frame where a person serves their time…and the time frame…would start once the person has served their time and doesn’t roll from the date that they are convicted.” Adams framed the amendment as aligning the statutory clock with post-incarceration reentry rather than conviction date.

Opponents argued the amendment could have the opposite effect for many convictions, effectively lengthening the period before a person becomes eligible under the bill’s look-back rule. One member of the committee said the amendment “would actually restart the clock in a way that would actually not benefit them,” noting differences between shorter and longer sentences and existing carve-outs for the most serious offenses.

After discussion, the committee moved SB 937 favorable as amended. The roll-call recorded the bill as passing with 13 votes in favor. Supporters said the bill balances tenant opportunity and landlord discretion; critics warned landlords will still face practical challenges in screening and nonrenewal decisions if tenancies fail.

The committee’s action advances the bill to the next stage; members noted additional review and floor debate are expected as the measure moves to the full chamber.