Committee Summary for House Committee on Housing (01/27/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1112 00:15:30.160 - 8:10:46 AM	Public Hearing	relative to snow removal responsibilities in residential lease agreements.	Foss, Lily(D)[D-]2025
HB1143 00:56:55.920 - 8:52:11 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the remediation of mold in rental housing.	King, Seth(R)[B+]2025
HB1171 01:10:09.520 - 9:05:25 AM	Public Hearing	relative to eviction safeguards for tenants whose Social Security payments are disrupted.	O'Rorke, Terri(D)[F]2025
HB1336 01:35:43.600 - 9:30:59 AM	Public Hearing	allowing exceptions to the cap on residential security deposits for applicants not meeting standard approval criteria.	Alexander, Joe(R)[A+]2025
HB1371 02:48:28.720 - 10:43:44 AM	Public Hearing	prohibiting application fees for residential rental agreements.	Lucas, Janet(D)[F]2025
HB1371 03:04:46.640 - 11:00:02 AM	Public Hearing	prohibiting application fees for residential rental agreements.	Lucas, Janet(D)[F]2025
HB1375 03:06:31.600 - 11:01:47 AM	Public Hearing	prohibiting landlords from charging more than one application fee per tenant every 12 months.	Read, Ellen(D)[D]2025
HB1450 04:09:09.680 - 12:04:25 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the designation and control of shared facilities in rental properties.	Kelley, Diane(R)[A-]2025
HB1553 04:36:51.039 - 12:32:07 PM	Public Hearing	relative to pet-related fees and rent in residential tenancies.	Long, Patrick(D)[D]2025
HB1709 05:05:52.160 - 1:01:08 PM	Public Hearing	relative to prohibiting the rental of residential property to individuals unlawfully present in the United States.	Alexander, Joe(R)[A+]2025
CACR16 2024-?h (voter information amendment) 06:09:53.840 - 2:05:09 PM	Public Hearing	relating to property. Providing that individuals may sleep on property they own or have a legal right to occupy.	Read, Ellen(D)[D]2025

HB1112: Representative Foss Support00:15:30.160 - 8:10:46 AM; Representative Foss, the prime sponsor, explains that New Hampshire is unique in New England for not specifying snow removal responsibilities in residential leases. The bill, modeled on laws in Massachusetts and Maine, requires that responsibility be explicitly stated in the lease, with a default to the landlord for common areas if not specified. This clarifies liability, especially in cases of slips and falls, and ensures enforceability without mandating who is responsible. Existing leases are grandfathered, and parties can negotiate terms. She addresses questions on effective date, applicability to single-family units, and real-world issues, emphasizing clarity in contract law.
HB1112: Matt Bacon, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Oppose00:24:40.640 - 8:19:56 AM; Matt Bacon, a landlord and member of the Realtors' public policy committee, opposes the bill as written due to ambiguities in scope, timing, and ongoing responsibilities for snow removal. He argues it burdens small 'mom and pop' landlords, especially with month-to-month leases renewing automatically, defaulting responsibility to them without awareness. He suggests education could help but prefers no default, highlighting issues like multiple tenants and comparisons to city maintenance failures. He supports clarifying language for timing (e.g., within 24 hours post-storm) and would back a version requiring specification in leases without unlimited liability.
HB1112: Adam Thompson, Scenic Historic Ward 3 Nashua Support00:35:53.920 - 8:31:09 AM; Adam Thompson, a disabled veteran and renter from Nashua, supports the bill, even if amended. He shares personal experiences of disputes with landlords over unclear snow removal duties, leading to tension and safety concerns. He notes that explicit lease terms would reduce ambiguity in multi-unit buildings with common areas and protect both parties from liability in slip-and-fall incidents by providing clear documentation.
HB1112: Nick Norman, advocate for housing providers and landlords Oppose00:38:09.839 - 8:33:25 AM; Nick Norman opposes the bill's language, though he supports requiring explicit definition of responsibilities in leases. He raises concerns about undefined liability, potential invalidation of existing leases, and state interference in private contracts. He criticizes unnecessary provisions that could invite legal challenges and argues against a default to landlords, as it disrupts arrangements like rent discounts for tenant-handled snow removal. He offers to work on amendments and believes most landlord-tenant relationships are reasonable without state mandates. In response to questions, he shares that tenants generally don't frivolously sue but bad actors exist.
HB1112: Jared Sullivan, Representative for Grafton 2 (Bethlehem and Franconia) Support00:45:15.040 - 8:40:31 AM; Jared Sullivan, a small business property manager and landlord from Grafton 2, supports the bill for clarifying snow removal duties, which he already handles for driveways and parking but expects tenants to manage paths to vehicles. He notes tenant inquiries about unclear lease terms with other landlords and argues the bill imposes low burden, as landlords can shift responsibility via lease. It benefits out-of-state renters unfamiliar with snow and improves relationships by reducing ambiguity. He confirms the applicability section grandfathering existing leases addresses concerns.
HB1112: Chris Freeman, housing provider in Keene Information Only00:47:42.480 - 8:42:58 AM; Chris Freeman, a housing provider in Keene, is inclined against (ITL) the bill but agrees clarity in contracts is desirable. He already specifies snow removal in leases and sees it as a soft mandate under RSA 540-A, potentially elevating it to a statutory right and affecting slip-and-fall litigation by presuming landlord duty. Concerns include joint liability in multi-family assignments, strategic drafting complications, and unclear application to off-site parking leases, which could create disputes over privity and responsibility. He suggests examining these issues, noting similarities to ambiguities in RSA 540.
HB1143: Representative Brian Cole, introducing on behalf of Representative King Information Only00:56:55.920 - 8:52:11 AM; Representative Cole briefly introduces HB1143, relative to mold remediation in rental housing, without taking questions.
HB1143: Chris Freeman, housing provider in New Hampshire Oppose00:56:55.920 - 8:52:11 AM; Chris Freeman opposes HB1143, which would add significant mold infestation to RSA 48-A:14 as a minimum standards violation with daily penalties. He criticizes the lack of definitions for 'significant infestation,' standards, evidentiary thresholds, and procedural safeguards, creating vague enforcement and due process risks. The bill allows violations based on hidden mold detectable only by professional testing without protocols, imposes strict liability regardless of cause (e.g., tenant behavior), and lacks knowledge requirements or cure opportunities. It authorizes broad municipal powers without inspection guidelines or appeal processes, potentially leading to anxiety-provoking enforcement for landlords, especially with sensitive tenants.
HB1143: Nick Norman Information Only01:02:31.440 - 8:57:47 AM; The transcript cuts off before Nick Norman's testimony on HB1143, so no summary is available from the provided content.
HB1143: Nick Norman Oppose01:02:54.640 - 8:58:10 AM; Nick Norman opposes HB1143, agreeing with Chris Freeman's analysis. He highlights that mold spores are ubiquitous and require moisture to grow, often caused by tenant behaviors like not using exhaust fans, cooking without ventilation, using humidifiers, or poor cleaning. He shares an experience where a tenant's uncleanliness caused a major mold issue that landlords had to fix at their own expense. Examples of tenant-caused mold include overflows, damp laundry, and toilet backups. He notes the bed bug law defines responsibilities clearly, which this bill lacks, unfairly blaming landlords entirely. Simple over-the-counter solutions exist for early mold detection. During Q&A, he suggests addressing landlord-caused moisture but emphasizes tenant responsibility and the complexity of the issue, warning it could raise rents and harm affordability.
HB1143: Sophia Johnson, New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services Information Only01:07:24.400 - 9:02:40 AM; Sophia Johnson from DHHS provides neutral information on HB1143, offering the department as a resource. She explains that the bill amends RSA 48A to address mold in minimum housing standards, enforceable by health officers. Federal guidance advises against air testing due to lack of health-based limits and potential misleading results. Mold spores are naturally present indoors and outdoors and can't be fully eliminated; issues arise in damp conditions. Recommendations include fixing visible mold by addressing moisture sources, cleaning, keeping buildings watertight, ensuring proper plumbing, and controlling humidity. DHHS is available for guidance and questions.
HB1171: Representative Terry Oor, Cheshire District 7, Keene Support01:10:09.520 - 9:05:25 AM; Representative Terry Oor introduces HB1171, proposing a 90-day grace period for tenants unable to pay rent due to unanticipated delays in social security payments, protecting vulnerable seniors and disabled individuals reliant on these funds. He cites support from AEL New Hampshire Disability Justice Advocates, reading their statement that the period is humane, prevents catastrophes from administrative failures, and recognizes inability to pay without received funds. The bill amends RSA 540:3, allowing time to reinstate payments or find shelter without immediate eviction. He recommends it ought to pass and offers to answer questions. During Q&A, he notes no specific NH cases but wants proactive protection.
HB1171: Chris Freeman, housing provider in Keene, Walpole, Lebanon Oppose01:13:49.520 - 9:09:05 AM; Chris Freeman urges finding HB1171 inexpedient to legislate. He acknowledges hardships from benefit disruptions but argues the bill creates an unworkable eviction defense without cure mechanisms, payment plans, or repayment requirements, allowing 90 days of non-payment and potential exit. The undefined 'unanticipated halt' lacks evidentiary standards, burdening summary eviction processes with federal benefits disputes. It shifts federal risks to landlords unfairly, creates a special rule for social security versus other income sources, and lacks a limiting principle. During Q&A, he notes landlords work with tenants, opposes special classes in eviction law, and distinguishes from other bills by emphasizing case-by-case accommodations over statutory changes.
HB1171: Nick Norman Oppose01:21:33.679 - 9:16:49 AM; Nick Norman opposes HB1171, requesting inexpedient to legislate due to undefined terms and burdens on landlords. The 90-day period plus 6-8 week eviction process means months of lost income, with no clarity on tenant responsibility for back rent, which is hard to collect. It doesn't distinguish between tenants with assets or other income sources, allows tenant-caused disruptions, and lacks proof requirements or limits on invocations. It could enable scams and financial strain on small landlords. He references emailed detailed testimony. During Q&A, he explains support for speeding evictions in bad faith cases (e.g., HB1598) while accommodating good tenants via payment plans, and notes no known cases of evictions for social security delays.
HB1171: Matt Bacon Oppose01:29:47.360 - 9:25:03 AM; Matt Bacon opposes HB1171, echoing prior concerns about creating a special income class, which could deter landlords from renting to social security recipients. The 90-day period plus eviction time burdens owners, especially for single-family rentals, with 5 months of non-payment. Ambiguities include late fees, 'unanticipated halt' definitions, and no tie to actual delay length (e.g., 90 days for a 30-day delay). Landlords rarely evict for short, known delays as payments arrive quickly. He urges ITL and offers questions. During Q&A, he notes online support stats don't alter concerns.
HB1336: Representative Joe Alexander, Gothtown Support01:35:43.600 - 9:30:59 AM; Representative Joe Alexander introduced HB1336, explaining that it amends RSA 54A to allow landlords to require up to two months' rent as a security deposit for applicants who do not meet standard approval criteria, subject to guardrails. He emphasized that this provides flexibility for landlords to rent to lower-income individuals or those with poor credit, while noting the bill needs amendment to prevent it from becoming standard practice. He highlighted bipartisan support and the goal of increasing housing access, and addressed committee questions on affordability, the 650 FICO score threshold, potential abuse of discretion, and housing stability.
HB1336: Chris Freeman, housing provider Support01:44:36.560 - 9:39:52 AM; Chris Freeman, drafter of HB1336 and a housing provider focusing on affordable co-living, urged the committee to recommend the bill as ought to pass. He described the bill as moderate, allowing double deposits for applicants not meeting disclosed criteria within state caps, with rights to rescreening and refund after six months. He critiqued current law's one-month cap inconsistencies, argued it reduces regressive screening outcomes compared to alternatives like co-signers or prepaid rent, incentivizes accessible criteria, and extends regulated practices already used by some landlords. He addressed questions on racial disparities in credit scores, disclosure requirements, and uniform application to prevent discrimination.
HB1336: Nick Taylor, Director of Housing Action New Hampshire Oppose01:56:27.440 - 9:51:43 AM; Nick Taylor expressed concerns about HB1336, appreciating its intent to lower risk for landlords but highlighting the financial burden of a $4,000 upfront cost for a median $2,000 two-bedroom apartment, which could cause instability, debt, or missed payments for low-income renters. He noted nonprofits like Key Connect New Hampshire already address risks through mediation and deposit assistance, and doubling deposits would exacerbate the primary barrier of the first month's rent. He suggested supporting such programs instead. In responses, he affirmed skepticism about helping enough people and emphasized the program's success in scaling statewide.
HB1336: Elliot Barry, retired attorney, New Hampshire Legal Assistance Oppose02:02:56.400 - 9:58:12 AM; Elliot Barry reluctantly opposed HB1336, citing the impracticality of low-income tenants affording $4,000 upfront plus moving costs, lack of assistance programs (e.g., no statewide security deposit fund), and how income criteria (not exceeding three times rent) would exclude those paying over 50% of income on housing. He warned small landlords' non-compliance would normalize two-month deposits, violating the intent, and raised enforcement issues for disclosures and fair housing. He noted existing laws on deposits are often ignored without penalties deterring violations. In questions, he confirmed credit checks are common, leading to rejections, and stressed the bill's potential catastrophe for low/moderate-income renters.
HB1336: Nick Norman, advocate for housing providers Support02:16:00.320 - 10:11:16 AM; Nick Norman supports HB1336 with some drafting changes, viewing it as a win-win for tenants and landlords. It allows marginally qualified tenants to offer up to a two-month security deposit to mitigate landlord risk, increasing housing opportunities. Qualified tenants pay only one month's deposit. He notes it won't be widely used due to financial constraints but helps in cases where tenants have temporary funds. He emphasizes fair application to avoid discrimination claims and suggests rephrasing the bill to 'a tenant may offer and a landlord may accept' instead of 'require' to reduce disparity impact risks. He proposes specific changes on pages 1-2 and corrects a technical error on refunds. During Q&A, he shares experiences of tenants offering extra payments but being unable to accept due to current law, and clarifies that advance rent is allowed but less valuable than extra security for damages.
HB1336: Ariel Hayes, renter from Dover, NH Oppose02:25:45.760 - 10:21:01 AM; Ariel Hayes opposes HB1336, sharing her personal story of homelessness at 22 after a breakup, living in her car for two weeks despite having degrees and a job lined up. Her parents helped with a one-month security deposit, which she couldn't have afforded if doubled. As a risky renter with limited credit, the bill would have prevented her from securing housing. Now stable for seven years, she works in youth homelessness and argues the bill would exacerbate challenges for young unhoused people who lack upfront funds for two months' rent. Early stable housing is crucial to prevent chronic homelessness. In Q&A, she notes unhoused youth lack knowledge and resources to navigate laws or recoup deposits, increasing risks from bad landlords, and agrees the bill would prioritize tenants with cash over those needing support.
HB1336: Jennifer Chisum, Executive Director, New Hampshire Coalition to End Homelessness Oppose02:33:22.160 - 10:28:38 AM; Jennifer Chisum opposes HB1336, concerned it would increase homelessness by raising upfront costs. She references her report showing 49% of renter households are cost-burdened, with low-income ones severely so. Landlords could demand three months' rent upfront from 76% of low-income households, totaling about $5,500 for a median two-bedroom. This strains security deposit assistance providers, who already struggle; last year, NH 211 received over 1,000 requests. The bill disproportionately affects minorities at higher homelessness risk. As a UNH adjunct, she notes graduating social work students' anxieties about affording to stay in NH due to housing costs. In Q&A, she confirms it would burden assistance organizations, potentially halving the number served with finite funding.
HB1336: Don McKenna, New Hampshire Legal Assistance Oppose02:39:49.760 - 10:35:05 AM; Don McKenna provides information on HB1336's affordability impacts amid NH's housing crisis. Median household income is $100,000, but renters' is $59,000; median two-bedroom rent is $2,240, close to emergency savings many lack. Half of renters pay over 30% of income on housing, 55% of low-income renters over 50%. The bill's three-times-rent requirement and extra deposit would worsen this, making housing less affordable despite supply issues. Even if low-income renters scrape together extra funds, it diverts money from essentials like utilities or childcare.
HB1371: Representative Janet Lucas, State Representative from Campton, NH Support02:48:28.720 - 10:43:44 AM; Rep. Janet Lucas supports HB1371 to prohibit non-refundable application fees, which burden low-income and protected class renters in a competitive market. Fees create barriers, enable discrimination, and serve as unregulated profit without value to applicants. She shares a constituent's experience of fees before tours, possibly scams, and notes one apartment could generate $2,500 in fees from 50 applicants. Renters lose money on rejections, opting for lower-quality housing. The bill shifts screening costs to landlords, who benefit, and deters tire-kickers via credit inquiry warnings. Citing a Georgetown Journal article, she argues fees turn housing searches into gambles undermining equity and anti-homelessness efforts. Modeled on Vermont's 2013 law, it promotes fairness. In Q&A, she was unaware of existing law on refunding fees beyond actual costs and finds 'reasonable costs' vague.
HB1371: Chris Freeman, Keene, NH Oppose02:56:04.160 - 10:51:20 AM; Chris Freeman opposes HB1371, urging ITL. On fees, he views applications as a funnel filtering low-intent inquiries; fees recover screening costs and deter frivolity. Prohibiting them shifts costs to landlords, raising rents, and may lead to stricter pre-screening, rejecting more borderline applicants. NH's recent law already balances this reasonably. On SSN restrictions, they're essential for accurate credit/background checks and other uses like IRS forms or credit reporting. Delaying collection post-approval risks data security via less secure methods like email. The bill's placement in 356C is incorrect. In Q&A, he agrees tenants' unawareness of rights is a pattern but shouldn't negate laws; suggests proactive education.
HB1371: Nick Norman, advocate for housing providers Oppose03:01:51.120 - 10:57:07 AM; Nick Norman opposes HB1371, as application processing costs are significant and standard; without fees, rents will rise for all. It's fair applicants pay for the service. Banning SSNs prevents credit checks and other necessary uses. Fees screen out non-serious applicants. Without fees, markets may shift to tenants providing their own checks, disadvantaging marginally qualified ones. Such tenants can already discuss qualifications pre-application to avoid fees.
HB1371: David Klein, small landlord in the Seacoast area Oppose03:04:46.640 - 11:00:02 AM; David Klein objects to the provision in HB 1371 that prohibits asking for a social security number for credit reports. He explains that credit bureaus require it under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ensure privacy and accuracy, and they enforce strict security measures. Without it, landlords cannot properly screen tenants, similar to how banks require it for mortgages on expensive units.
HB1375: Representative Ellen Reed, Rockingham 10 (Newmarket and Newfields) Support03:06:31.600 - 11:01:47 AM; Representative Reed introduces HB 1375 as an extension of prior legislation regulating application fees. She describes how, in a low vacancy market, landlords exploited applicants by charging high fees ($250 per adult) even for unavailable units or multiple times for the same background check across units. The bill limits fees to once per 12 months to prevent this abuse, allowing refreshes only when credit or background might change significantly. She notes Front Door's experiences and is open to questions on timelines.
HB1375: Nick Norman, advocate for housing providers Oppose03:11:42.479 - 11:06:58 AM; Nick Norman opposes HB 1375, arguing the 12-month limit is too long as life changes (e.g., job loss, bankruptcy, evictions) can occur quickly, necessitating fresh verifications like in mortgages. He states landlords rarely re-run checks unnecessarily and often hold applications for future units without new fees. He criticizes the $1,000 penalty as excessive for low-cost applications ($25-50) and is open to amendments limiting fees per applicant rather than per unit, but prefers no timeline.
HB1375: Chris Freeman, Keene, New Hampshire Oppose03:15:22.880 - 11:10:38 AM; Chris Freeman opposes HB 1375 based on his portfolio data, showing repeat applications are rare (4.6% of inquiries). He notes the bill's intent to stop multiple fees for multiple units isn't their practice, but the drafting is unclear regarding agents vs. landlords, potentially affecting unrelated owners. He argues 12 months is too long (suggests 30-60 days max), and waiving fees for reapplications creates administrative burdens in property systems. He highlights complexities with multiple entities and screening standards.
HB1375: David Klein, small landlord in the Seacoast area Oppose03:20:33.439 - 11:15:49 AM; David Klein, testifying again on HB 1375, emphasizes that significant credit changes (e.g., bankruptcy) can occur in as little as 30 days, making even short timelines risky for landlords. He urges the committee to consider this in negotiations, based on his experience representing bankruptcy clients.
HB1450: Representative Diane Kelly, Hillsborough District 32 (Temple, Antrim, Sharon, and Wilton) Support04:09:09.680 - 12:04:25 PM; Representative Kelly introduces HB 1450 to amend RSA 540-B:1 to include lessees (not just owners) in the definition of shared facilities, provided there's a written agreement referencing the statute. This clarifies eviction processes for sublessees in shared housing, resolving ambiguities where lessees can't evict problematic subtenants and owners disclaim responsibility. It ensures police and sheriffs can enforce remedies clearly, stemming from real-world difficulties in subletting scenarios.
HB1450: David Klein, small landlord in the Seacoast area Information Only04:15:00.000 - 12:10:16 PM; David Klein supports the concept of HB 1450 but suggests amendments: notices should inform sublessees that RSA 540-B applies (lacking full court protections) and confirm the lessee has the owner's permission to sublet, especially since many leases prohibit subletting. This would protect sublessees from eviction due to lessee breaches and requires clarifying wording in paragraph 3.
HB1450: Sabrina Rain Rom Information Only04:18:00.000 - 12:13:16 PM; Sabrina Rain Rom begins testimony but the provided transcript cuts off without further details.
HB1450: Sabrina Ramy, Manchester Support04:17:05.199 - 12:12:21 PM; Sabrina shares her personal experience as a lifelong Manchester resident and renter who faced challenges subleasing her apartment while being the sole leaseholder. She describes how informal agreements with college friends led to issues when roommates changed, resulting in animosity and an assault incident. Despite formal agreements with later roommates, she couldn't evict problematic ones due to unclear subleasing laws. Police, sheriff, and courts directed her to her landlord, who refused to evict individuals without agreements, forcing Sabrina to terminate her lease and lose her home after six months of turmoil. She supports the bill for providing a clearer foundation for subleasing, making agreements enforceable, and helping maintain household serenity.
HB1450: Hank Smith, Artist Support04:23:01.279 - 12:18:17 PM; Hank, an artist who moved to New Hampshire and ended up as the leaseholder in a sublease situation, recounts nearly losing his apartment multiple times due to unreliable roommates who stopped paying rent. As the broke primary tenant, he had to cover multiple rents, facing financial strain. Resources advised eviction of the entire lease, risking his own stability. He supports the bill for adding flexibility to modern roommate arrangements, reflecting how young people share housing affordably, and allowing sublessors to enforce eviction for non-payment without evicting everyone.
HB1450: Debbie Valente, Landlord Support04:26:03.359 - 12:21:19 PM; Debbie, an active New Hampshire landlord, supports the bill for empowering residents to control their living environment. She was Sabrina's landlord and details the assault incident where police asked Sabrina to leave temporarily for peace, but hostile tenants prevented her return. Debbie evicted eight people, including a squatter who sublet to a homeless person via sex favors, taking two months and causing confusion at police and courts. The bill would clarify procedures for police, sheriffs, and courts, reducing ambiguity and time spent, as she endured 12 hours at the Manchester police station.
HB1450: Chris Freeman, Housing Provider, Keene Information Only04:29:55.439 - 12:25:11 PM; Chris, specializing in shared facilities under RSA 540 not 540B, notes the bill may not directly affect his business but highlights legitimate tenant interaction issues in joint and several leases. He agrees on the need for clarity in dissolving shared responsibilities like security deposits and removing individuals without evicting all. He raises concerns about privity with landlords, potential mess from one tenant evicting another, subletting regulations, and drafting issues like designating shared facilities in a summary framework for unsophisticated users. Suggests considering 'lessor' instead of 'owner and lessee' but notes it could sweep in his model. Responds to questions on broader gaps like evicting guests or squatters, offering further feedback.
HB1553: Representative Brian Cole, Hillsboro Information Only04:36:51.039 - 12:32:07 PM; As prime sponsor, Rep. Cole briefly introduces the bill limiting monthly pet fees to 1% of rent, noting it allows security deposits and damage charges but prevents forcing tenants to choose between pets and housing. He takes no questions.
HB1553: Chris Freeman, Housing Provider, Keene Oppose04:37:54.958 - 12:33:10 PM; Chris opposes the bill, arguing price controls on pet fees shift costs to base rent, raising prices for non-pet owners and reducing pet-friendly supply, increasing demand and prices. It lacks proportionality to pet damage, creates adverse selection, increases friction for assistance animals (potentially raising disability costs), and invites fee-shifting litigation over small disputes. His no-pets business wouldn't change. On non-refundable fees, he believes they may violate RSA 540 as security deposits; pet rent offsets accelerated wear like floor scuffing not covered by normal wear deductions.
HB1553: Joanie McIntyre, Real Estate Agent, Concord Oppose04:43:06.560 - 12:38:22 PM; Vice chair of public policy at NH Realtors Association, Joanie opposes the 1% cap ($20/month on $2,000 rent, $240/year), insufficient for carpet cleaning or pet damage like scratches and odors, based on her experience with pet-worn homes.
HB1553: Representative Long Support04:43:55.920 - 12:39:11 PM; Rep. Long supports the bill as a compromise allowing security deposits and damage charges but capping pet fees to help pet owners afford housing amid upfront costs like three months' rent. Suggests amending if 1% is too low rather than ITL, as excessive fees (e.g., 100% extra) are unreasonable. Notes pet restrictions hinder housing access, including for unhoused preferring cars over abandoning pets.
HB1553: Nick Norman Oppose04:47:37.920 - 12:42:53 PM; Nick opposes, warning it forces landlord losses, leading more to ban pets entirely. Fees should be market-driven due to issues like noise, allergies, inspections, and high damages (e.g., $1,000+ for carpets, odor treatments). 1% is inadequate; small claims ineffective for recovery. Conflicts with RSA 540-D:3 and HB 1336 on deposits. Service animals already protected. Pet rent acts like insurance over tenancy life, typically $25/month insufficient. Responds that bill doesn't force pet acceptance but caps fees harm viability; both pet and non-pet tenants can cause damage.
HB1553: Kurt Arenberg, NH State Director, Humane World for Animals Support04:54:20.480 - 12:49:36 PM; Kurt supports, noting it doesn't force pet acceptance but caps fees (1% reasonable, open to amendment) to help marginalized families, elderly, and low-income keep pets amid housing crisis. $20/month can decide between housing, food, or meds. Security deposits cover damages; contrasts with Australia's stricter rules. Cites Reagan-era study on elderly health decline without pets and unhoused refusing shelters over animals. If caps too low, landlords ban pets, but bill protects affordable access without burden.
HB1709: Representative Joe Alexander, Gstone Support05:05:52.160 - 1:01:08 PM; Prime sponsor Rep. Alexander introduces the bill making it a class B felony for unlawful U.S. presence applicants to fail to disclose status when applying for NH housing, aiming to free units for citizens amid 90,000-unit shortage by 2040. Notes drafting errors to avoid landlord verification burden, lists proof methods (e.g., NH license, passport, visa), and plans amendments for asylum seekers (legal during 1-year application). Defends against discrimination questions as court matters, emphasizes no sanctuary for illegals, rejects landlord penalties to avoid burden, clarifies disclosure not verification, and addresses mixed-status families by excluding U.S. citizens/minors.
HB1709: Representative Timothy Han, Strafford County District 10 Oppose05:22:11.200 - 1:17:27 PM; Rep. Han opposes the class B felony for applying for housing while unlawfully present as excessive, potentially intimidating citizens or asylum seekers. Compares to ICE actions risking civil unrest; suggests ITL as bill needs work and could weaponize felony threats in sweeps or pleas.
HB1709: William Gillette, Director of Public Policy and Advocacy, International Institute of New England Oppose05:27:55.040 - 1:23:11 PM; William opposes, noting NH's reliance on immigrants for workforce/population growth; bill chills all immigration amid fluid federal law. Burdens landlords assessing status, risks evictions/removals, affects mixed-status families (e.g., citizen children). Examples: placed 25 clients in jobs recently; NH needs immigrants in healthcare, construction. Leave enforcement to feds to avoid economic harm.
HB1709: Dylan Hoey, Director, New Hampshire Alliance of Immigrants and Refugees Oppose05:32:04.240 - 1:27:20 PM; Dylan, former consular officer, strongly opposes, arguing bill delegates complex federal immigration adjudication to untrained landlords, risking liability under discrimination laws. Calculating unlawful presence is difficult even for experts; many legal immigrants (e.g., pending adjustments) lack listed IDs. Class B felony punitive for errors/language barriers; harms economy by deterring immigrants. Encourages ITL; notes green money from immigrants.
HB1709: Avery Seir, Moderator, Ward 3, Manchester Oppose05:45:23.600 - 1:40:39 PM; Avery Seir testified about the negative impacts of HB 1709 on Ward 3 residents in Manchester, a dense downtown area with many asylum seekers and renters. She highlighted the burden on new US citizens without passports or birth certificates, potential confusion in implementation, and lack of clarity for renters and landlords. Seir expressed concerns about increased anxiety among asylum seekers, chaos in schools and housing assistance, and barriers for people exiting homelessness due to documentation requirements. She shared a story from door-knocking about immigrants' fear of engagement due to ICE concerns and noted Ward 3's support for progressive politicians opposing such measures.
HB1709: Kristen Evans, Director of Policy, Able New Hampshire Oppose05:54:49.440 - 1:50:05 PM; Kristen Evans strongly opposed HB 1709, calling it discriminatory and harmful, weaponizing housing for surveillance and exclusion. She argued it fails to address the housing crisis, instead building barriers and fear, particularly affecting people with disabilities who face high poverty and housing insecurity. Evans highlighted risks of racial profiling by landlords, targeting of families, workers, and children, and distraction from real issues like underinvestment in housing. She urged rejection to uphold housing as a human right and avoid legislating cruelty.
HB1709: Rachel Potter, Policy Associate, ACLU of New Hampshire Oppose05:58:00.320 - 1:53:16 PM; Rachel Potter opposed HB 1709 for expanding state power into federal immigration matters, making non-disclosure a class B felony and creating an unconstitutional enforcement system. She raised due process concerns for those with pending statuses like asylum, potential discrimination under the Fair Housing Act, harm to families including US-born children, and costly litigation. Potter urged voting ITL on HB 1709 and HB 11499 to avoid taxpayer-funded defenses of indefensible laws.
HB1709: Patrick Bender, representing New Hampshire First, Manchester Support06:02:44.878 - 1:58:00 PM; Patrick Bender supported HB 1709 as a deterrent for undocumented immigrants, clarifying it targets only those here illegally without affecting citizens. He dismissed concerns about children as 'anchor babies,' argued it protects existing residents, places onus on individuals not landlords, and prevents ICE issues by keeping undocumented people out. Bender suggested working on the bill if issues arise, viewing it as straightforward and beneficial for New Hampshire citizens.
CACR16 2024-?h (voter information amendment): Ellen Reed, State Representative, Rockingham District 10, Newmarket and Newfields Support06:09:53.840 - 2:05:09 PM; Ellen Reed, the sponsor, explained CACR16 as a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to sleep, rest, or occupy property for temporary repose if legally present, without prohibition solely for sleeping purposes. She addressed exclusionary zoning preventing camping on one's land (e.g., tents, RVs), empowering individuals amid developer-town conflicts. Reed opposed arresting people for existing or sleeping as a biological need, clarified it doesn't affect commercial campgrounds, water/sewer regulations, or public land closures, and noted an amendment to the voter information for clarity against litigation.
CACR16 2024-?h (voter information amendment): Heath Howard, State Representative, Strafford District 4, Strafford and Barrington Support06:23:01.680 - 2:18:17 PM; Heath Howard supported CACR16 to protect vulnerable people from policies hiding homelessness through arrests for sleeping, which create criminal records hindering reintegration. He argued it prevents government overreach, distinguishes survival from crime, aligns with constitutional natural rights, and stops penalizing poverty without solving housing issues like building homes or funding care. Howard urged passing it to focus on real solutions.
CACR16 2024-?h (voter information amendment): Matt Mayberry, CEO, New Hampshire Homebuilders Association Oppose06:26:20.878 - 2:21:36 PM; Matt Mayberry opposed CACR16, arguing it codifies sleeping in vehicles, undermines ADU legislation and zoning, allows sleeping in businesses or condos, and enables abuse like domestic violence victims' spouses camping nearby despite restraining orders. He warned of loopholes for indefinite temporary stays and urged against passing without detailed spelling out to avoid unintended consequences like slums or legal challenges.