There are several bills this week that have decisions or reports filed.
The major event for us is still HB482, The Bedbug Bill, which, as mentioned last week, passed the Senate (& previously passed the House). It is now making its way to the governor.
We have no updated status on HB413, Abandonment, yet. For detailed info on HB413 & HB482, see Summaries & Full Detail for each category further below. (includes property owner position, committee contact info, talking points, and more).
Decisions/Updated Status:See Bills Updated Status summary below.
Full details on all bills above which includes property owner position, contact info, talking points, and more.
Title: relative to service of demand for rent and eviction notice.
Title: (New Title) relative to property abandoned by tenants.
Title: (New Title) providing immunity from criminal prosecution for seeking medical assistance with an emergency drug or alcohol overdose event.
Notes: from David Cline; This bill gives civil and criminal immunity to any person who in good faith places a 911 call to report "" a suspected drug or alcohol related emergency"" This maybe a bill we want to support. Tenant do stupid things, and if we, as the landlord either have another tenant call 911, or one of us calls 911, to report a drug or alcohol emergency, it would be nice to have some immunity. Joel Winters is a sponsor. The trouble is that it is scheduled for 11:00 and I can not be there that early.
Recommend we support the bill, even by emails after the hearing.
Title: regarding infestation of bed bugs in rental housing.
Summary: This is a good bill because it puts some of the burden of infestation back to the tenant. It allows landlords to evict based on non-payment if the tenant does not pay for extermination if it is determined that the tenant brought them in.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill addresses landlord, tenant, and municipality responsibility for bed bug infestations.
This is one of the most complicated bills that will have a very direct impact on both landlords and tenants.
The first paragraph of the bill, the declaration of purpose, if the bill passes, is a declaration by the legislature that reasonable measures need to be taken to promote prompt and effective mediation of bedbug infestation. This declaration can open the door to lawsuits for failure to take such actions. It is a statement to everyone not to ignore the problem.
The second and third paragraph of the bill incorporates into the state housing code that not taking measures to remediate a bedbug infestation will be a violation of the minimum standards for housing in the state. Communities can enact their own more stringent codes. This section gives building inspectors the power to deal with bedbug infestations the same powers they have to deal with other infestations.
The fourth paragraph, by amending RSA 540-A, WILL ALLOW LANDLORDS TO ENTER APARTMENTS WITHOUT TENANT CONSENT OR NOTICE to formulate a plan or engage in emergency remediation of rodents or insects, including bedbugs, so long as the entry took place within 72 hours of the landlord first receiving notice of the infestation. This paragraph is a major benefit to landlords to start dealing with the problem promptly. If it takes longer than the 72 hours, the current law applies, the landlord must give the tenant reasonable notice under the circumstances and a tenant is barred from prohibiting the landlord from entering.
The fifth paragraph of the bill makes it a violation of RSA 540-A for a landlord willfully, that means the landlord intended, not to investigate a complaint within 7 days and to take reasonable measures to remediate an infestation.
the tenant to willfully fail to comply with written instructions from the landlord or pest control operator to remediate so long as the instructions were given to an adult, someone 18 years or older, and the tenant was given a reasonable opportunity to comply of not less than 72 hours.
This section of the bill makes it clear that a landlord may only enter without the consent of the tenant to make emergency repairs or with a court order.
If the landlord tries to evict the tenant or seek damages for the infestation, the landlord bears the burden of proof (by the preponderance of evidence) that the tenant was responsible for infestation and the landlord offered the tenant the opportunity to enter into a payment plan.
However, the bill gives the landlord a rebuttable presumption that if there were no reports of bedbugs in the tenants unit or directly adjacent units or units directly above or below within 6 months then the tenant was responsible for the infestation. Paragraph 6 then goes on to give courts guidance to be used in determining if the tenant was responsible for the infestation or the bedbugs came from another unit or were in the unit at the time the tenant took possession of the apartment or single family house.
Paragraph 7 of the bill adds a new ground for eviction, but on a 30 days notice. That ground is willful failure of the tenant to prepare a unit for remediation after the tenant was given reasonable notice. Keep in mind that although this paragraph requires a 30 days notice, the landlord can seek a court order as noted above pursuant to RSA 540-A. Those orders can be obtained fairly quickly.
Paragraph 7 also makes it clear that the $1,000 fine for the initial violation and the $1,000 per day fine for a violation after a court order set forth in RSA 540-A is issued does not apply when dealing with infestations.
We support this bill. It is a balance between the interests of society, the landlords and the tenants. As landlords we now have a clearly defined responsibility to remediate the bedbugs, but we have the ability to seek financial reimbursement from a tenant who brought the problem into our building. We also gain the ablity to have the courts order the irresponsible tenants to join in the remediation effort or face contempt and/or eviction. The tenants will have means to force the landlords who do not maintain their buildings, the irresponsible landlord, to remediate.
We also support this bill because I fear that someone will propose, if this does not pass, a bill that would not be as balanced, and the landlord would be responsible not only for remediation but all the costs of such. Further, such a bill may not include as a ground for eviction failure of a tenant to cooperate in the remediation effort. WE COULD DO A LOT WORSE AND LET'S NOT TAKE THAT RISK.
Title: relative to the property taxation of qualifying historic buildings.
Summary: This bill is enabling legislation for municipalities in regards to history buildings that are one hundred years or older, owned by a non-profit organization, and are on the state or federal historic register. If a town adopts the provisions of this bill, then such buildings can not be assessed for more than 10% of the building’s market value.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill enables towns and cities to appraise certain qualifying historic buildings at a percentage of market value in order to encourage the preservation of the historic buildings.
The impact will be that the tax base in a municipality will be slightly reduced, and all other property tax payers would have to make up the difference in a higher tax rate.
Since the bill has minimal impact on us and has a large number of sponsors, we recommend no action.
Title: relative to the liability of landowners who permit use of their land for recreational activities.
Summary: The bill states that the owner of land who allows its use for recreational activities owes no duty of care to keep it safe for those who use the land or who construct structures on the land. The current paragraph II seems to say almost the same thing.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill provides that landowners who permit the use of their land for outdoor recreational activities owe no duty of care to individuals engaged in the recreational activity, including to those engaged in the construction of facilities associated with the outdoor activity.
Not sure what the drafters of the bill were trying to accomplish.
Title: relative to residential units in rooming houses.
Summary: Presently RSA 540 is excluded from tenants in a rooming house where the tenant stays fewer than 90 days.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill clarifies that the exclusion of rooming houses from the definition of tenancy cannot be extended by directing the occupant to move from one room to another within the 90-day exemption period.
Note that since it is not directly addressed in the bill, it can be argued, that if the guest requests a room change, then the 90 days is broken, since, if the bill passes, the legislature had the opportunity to address this and did not.
If the guest stays 90 days or more, RSA 540 would apply, and the guest would have to be evicted, because at that point the guest now becomes a tenant. Within less than 90 days the owner should have some knowledge if the guest is a problem, and should ask the guest to leave to avoid invoking RSA 540 rights.
A limited number of our members suffer a large impact from this bill. If it affects you be active about it.
Find an extra $300-$800 a month to help get you started on saving?
Do I need an additional stream of income?
Could Rental property help increase my income?
What do I need to learn to become a Landlord?
HB482, The Bedbug Bill, has now passed the Senate (& previously passed the House). It will now be making its way to the governor.
Please contact the governor’s office at 603-271-2121 & ask her to vote in favor of the bill.
HB413, The Abandonment Bill will have a small but important amendment that clarifies language and sets that start date upon passage instead of waiting for beginning of next year. We have seen and approve the amendment but it is not officially released yet.
Please write to your Senator and ask them to vote in favor of HB413.
See more info in Summaries & Full Detail for each category further below which includes property owner position, committee contact info, talking points, and more).
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill excludes assisted living facilities and community residences for the developmentally disabled and chronically ill from the definition of tenant for purposes of landlord/tenant law. This bill also requires that security deposits for assisted living facilities be subject to RSA 540-A.
There is still time to contact your senator if you do so immediately.
HB413 will have a small but important amendment that clarifies language and sets that start date upon passage instead of waiting for beginning of next year. We have seen and approve the amendment but it is not officially released yet.
We need everyone to write to the Senate and ask them to vote in favor of HB482 without any modifications and to vote in favor of HB413 as amended.
See more info in Summaries & Full Detail for each category further below. (includes property owner position, committee contact info, talking points, and more).(to jump right to bill detail, use Control-F, Find).
Senate Status: HB 482-FN, regarding infestation of bed bugs in rental housing.
Senator Reagan for the committee.
Title: (New Title) relative to the use of proceeds from the regional greenhouse gas initiative program.
Summary: This is a complex bill dealing with the regulation of the discharge of pollutants into the air. The first provision would remove state wide caps on sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen emissions. The bill then goes on to repeal the greenhouse gas initiative.
We spoke with the sponsor and he seems to be a common sense business person.
The Green House Gas Initiative, GHGI, is already in place in NH. Utilities companies charge extra fees on their utility bills. On PSNH bills the System Benefits Charge (3%-4% of total bill) goes to support GHGI.
Those monies that come from the GHGI mosty support large politically correct industries but not necessarily investments that make good business sense. Also, GHGI monies rarely go to the small companies and individuals which is make up most of the NH business landscape.
We believe in the long run it drives up costs and drives away businesses.
The sponsor of the bill would like to see the GHGI eliminated but that is unlikely in this administration. So the bill will attempt to reduce the scope of the GHGI in NH.
This is a complicated issue. With the information we have so far, some of us believe this bill will be good for business.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill repeals the New Hampshire regional greenhouse gas initiative program.
Some of our membership make reference to legislation in the name of environmental causes that actually push socialist agendas.
In order to really understand the bill, it would take hours, and expertise that we just do not have. If you follow this kind of thing please let us know your thoughts.
Title: relative to the collection of the amount of the property tax deferral for the elderly or disabled upon sale of the property.
Summary: RSA 72:38-a allows for deferral of property taxes for elderly and the disabled. The current law does address the payment of the taxes upon the death of the elderly or disabled person. (Elderly is someone 65 or older, a disabled person is someone receiving Social Security Disability Income Benefits). The taxing authorities can grant the deferment if the taxes cause, in their opinion undue hardship or the possible loss of the property. Current law does not address what happens if the property is sold.
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill requires that the amount of the tax deferral and accrued interest be paid to the municipality granting the deferral upon the sale of the property to a purchaser.
HB 655 fills that void in RSA 72:38-a. Simply, all deferred taxes are to be paid upon sale, and the municipal lien is to be released. The rest of the bill addresses situations when the taxes are not paid upon sale, basically stating times and procedure for a tax sale.
This bill deals with owners of limited means occupying their own housing.
More bills have crossed over from House to Senate and vice versa.
The important bill this past week was:HB482, The Bedbug Bill.
We support the bill because it is a balanced bill resulting from about 3 years of deliberations from all stake holders including landlords and tenants.
At the Senate hearing all stake holders spoke in favor of the bill and we were able to get across to the Senate committee that we needed them to leave the bill alone. Keep it as is because it is already balanced and any changes would likely unbalance it and change it from a good bill to a bad bill.
After testimony was over the committee immediately voted unanimously “ought to pass”.
Now it will work its way to the senate floor.
We need everyone to write to the Senate and ask them to vote in favor of the bill without any modifications.
Stay tuned. We’re expecting it to come out of committee with minor positive tweaks, “ought to pass” and then to the Senate floor.
See Bills Updated Status summary below.
See below for full details on all bills listed above (includes property owner position, contact info, talking points, and more).