Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tenant Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel hears bill to let surviving family terminate a lease after a tenant's death
Summary
Committee adopted a technical amendment and laid over House File 3981, which would reduce notice requirements allowing surviving family or representatives to terminate a lease after a tenant's death and align the death statute with the infirmity statute; housing advocates supported the change while housing providers warned of operational imbalance.
House File 3981, proposed to let surviving family members or designated representatives end a lease when a tenant dies, was presented to the Housing Finance & Policy Committee and laid over for further drafting.
Representative Lee described the bill as a pragmatic response to constituent experience in which families must continue paying rent for months after a tenant’s death. "This is a common-sense bill that would allow surviving family or other representatives of the deceased tenant to terminate a lease upon death," the representative said.
Maya Graham, a housing attorney at Home Line, testified in support and described the bill’s specific reforms: it would amend two statutes that currently permit tenants to end a lease only with two months’ notice—one for death and one for infirmity. The proposed changes would reduce notice periods, align the death statute with a 2020 amendment to the infirmity statute (so a single tenant’s death can trigger lease termination in certain circumstances), and require surviving co-tenants to agree to termination to prevent surprises for those remaining in the unit.
Cecil Smith of the Minnesota Multi Housing Association said housing providers appreciate the intent but warned the bill could create an operational imbalance: shorter notice windows for termination while providers’ obligations to make units available or pursue estate remedies would remain. Smith also raised concerns about the proposed penalty structure and asked the committee to resolve conflicts with existing statute language.
Committee members questioned retroactivity and were told the bill is not retroactive: leases signed prior to July 1, 2026 would remain under the existing statute. Members expressed broad sympathy for protecting surviving tenants and modernizing dated statutory language but also noted several drafting issues—including paragraph conflicts and the need to preserve operational predictability for housing providers—that require more work.
Next steps: House File 3981 was laid over so authors and stakeholders can resolve statutory conflicts and penalty language.
