Sunday, January 24, 2016

Legislative Update - Tuesday Morning Hearing - Update to Eviction Laws!


Howdee everyone,
Important Updates:
Both of our most important bills of this season, HB1370 & HB1204, have their public hearing on this Tuesday 1/26/16 morning.  We need you to be there. See more below.

We need some volunteers to rally troops to show up at hearings.  Would anyone help out?
 
Hearings this week:
01/26/2016 at 10:00 AM    LOB Room 208
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: 
 
01/26/2016 at 11:00 AM    LOB Room 208
HB1204, Eviction Workout
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: 
 
01/26/2016 at 01:00 PM    LOB Room 208
HB1196, Higher Damage Amount In Eviction Case
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For, If Amended.
 
01/28/2016 at 01:40 AM    LOB Room 301
HB1260, Repeal Authority For Administrative Inspection Warrants
Level of Response: Email legislators Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For
 
01/28/2016 at 09:00 AM    SH Room 100
SB395, Landlord Required To Install AC Units
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: Against
 
01/28/2016 at 01:45 PM    LOB Room 302
HB1579, Regulation Of Out Of State Real Estate Brokers
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 302
HB1150, UCC Failure to deliver goods
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 208
HB1175, Post-Judgment Real Estate Liens
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 

 
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
This is very important bill would allow 2 new categories for 7 day Eviction Notice.
Tenant not paying utilities
Unauthorized residents
It is greatly needed.
“Surprise Amendment”. ALSO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, there is talk of an amendment to this bill that would require evictions to be held in the court where the property resides instead of in the court where the owner resides.
We need to show up strong to defeat it.
We may still be developing talking points to this so if you plan to speak feel free to contact me Monday for latest update before you attend hearing.
HB1204, Eviction Workout
We initiated this critically important bill to correct for the NH Supreme Court case this past summer that now has virtually eliminated courts from exception eviction work out agreements between landlords and tenants.
The original bill was a “place holder” while we worked out language with our core team of landlords and NHLA.  We now have an agreed version that meets the needs of all parties.
So ignore the original bill.
This latest amendment is attached. We will call it the RPOA NHLA amendment.  It is critically important to show up and support this amendment.
(Obviously, eviction work out agreements are and option you could use with otherwise good tenants but you would not be required to do a work out agreement for a tenant you feel could not or would not keep up their end of the agreement).
HB1196, Higher Damage Amount In Eviction Case
This bill sounds well intentioned however we have some concerns that it could become a landlord trap if not amended.  See talking points in full detail below.
HB1656, Real Estate Transfer Tax Exception
This is also a very important bill because it would eliminate paying both seller and buyer side transfer (sales) tax when you simply transfer ownership into your own LLC or trust under certain circumstances.
The HOUSE Ways and Means committee seemed receptive to the bill.  Department of Revenue had no objection to the bill.
Action items this week:
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
1. If not done already study HB1370(full detail below)
Bill text is at
Develop some talking points as to why we need to keep the option for the landlord to have eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides. Note the present law already allows for the tenant to petition the court to move the venue to the court where the tenant resides.
2. Email to House Judiciary committee (HouseJudiciaryCommittee@leg.state.nh.us
Ask them to support & pass HB1370 as written. Also give reasons why the bill is needed.
Also give reasons why we need to keep the option for the landlord to have eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides and to not allow the amendment regarding forcing hearings to court where property is located.
3. Attend HB1370 Public Hearing Tuesday 10am LOB 208
(LOB=Legislative Office Building, Concord, NH)
At lease sign in on the “blue sheet” saying you’re in favor of the bill (just that really helps).  If you’re up for it sign on a pink card to speak and give you’re testimony supporting the bill.
…….
HB1204, Eviction Workout
1. If not done already study HB1204(full detail below)
See the RPOA NHLA amendment attached.
Develop some talking points as to why we need in some cases the ability to have eviction work out agreements tenants that are court enforceable that assured we are paid and the tenant does not loose their home.
2. Email to House Judiciary committee (HouseJudiciaryCommittee@leg.state.nh.us
Ask them to support & pass HB1204 as amended with the RPOA NHLA Amendment. Also give reasons why the bill is needed.
3. Attend HB1204 Public Hearing Tuesday 11am LOB 208
(Same room, just stay for the next hearing)
At lease sign in on the “blue sheet” saying you’re in favor of the bill (just that really helps).  If you’re up for it sign on a pink card to speak and give you’re testimony supporting the RPOA NHLA Amendment.
…….
HB1196, Higher Damage Amount In Eviction Case
Study the talking points in the full detail below and attend hearing Tuesday if it is of interest to you.
…….
HB1656, Real Estate Transfer Tax Exception
1. Email to HOUSE Ways and Means committee (HouseWays&MeansCommittee@leg.state.nh.us
Ask them to support & pass HB1656. Also give reasons why the bill is needed.
…….
See more info in Summaries & Full Detail for each bill further below. (includes property owner position, contact info, Talking points, and more).
(to jump right to bill detail, use Control-F, Find).
…….
We need some volunteers to rally troops to show up at hearings.  Would anyone help out?
Hearings this week:
01/26/2016 at 10:00 AM    LOB Room 208
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: 
01/26/2016 at 11:00 AM    LOB Room 208
HB1204, Eviction Workout
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: 
01/26/2016 at 01:00 PM    LOB Room 208
HB1196, Higher Damage Amount In Eviction Case
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For, If Amended.
01/28/2016 at 01:40 AM    LOB Room 301
HB1260, Repeal Authority For Administrative Inspection Warrants
Level of Response: Email legislators Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For
01/28/2016 at 09:00 AM    SH Room 100
SB395, Landlord Required To Install AC Units
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: Against
01/28/2016 at 01:45 PM    LOB Room 302
HB1579, Regulation Of Out Of State Real Estate Brokers
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 302
HB1150, UCC Failure to deliver goods
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 208
HB1175, Post-Judgment Real Estate Liens
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Hearings next week:
02/02/2016 at 10:00 AM    SH Room 103
SB342, Business Profits Tax Changes
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
02/03/2016 at 10:00 AM    LOB Room 208
HB1276, Propery Tax Abatements
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
02/03/2016 at 11:00 AM    LOB Room 212
HB636, Forfeiture Of Property
Level of Response: Email Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: Against
Further below is:
Bills Updated Status summary:
Full details on all bills above
(Which includes property owner position, contact info, talking points, and more)
Love & Light,
Nick Norman
Director of Legislative Affairs
==============================================
We only list the committee reports on the most important bills affecting the real estate business.  If you want to get the committee report on one of the other bills contact me & I will show you how to get them on line.  Its not terribly hard to get but not straight ahead either.
==============================================
Bills Updated Status summary:
We only list the committee reports on the most important bills affecting the real estate business.  If you want to get the committee report on one of the other bills contact me & I will show you how to get them on line.  It’s not terribly hard to get but not straight ahead either.
HB1370     
Title: relative to termination of tenancy.
Property Owner Position: 
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB1204     
Title: relative to payment of rent pending the stay of an eviction proceeding.
Property Owner Position: 
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB1196     
Title: relative to the amount of a money judgment for unpaid rent.
Property Owner Position: For, If Amended.
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB1260     
Title: repealing the authority of assessing officials to obtain administrative inspection warrants to complete property appraisals.
Property Owner Position: For
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
SB395     
Title: relative to minimum housing standards for tenants with health or respiratory issues.
Property Owner Position: Against
House Status: none
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1579     
Title: relative to regulation of the practice of out-of-state brokers by the real estate commission.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB1150     
Title: relative to the penalty for failure to deliver goods under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB1175     
Title: relative to post-judgment real estate liens.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
SB342     
Title: making certain changes to business profits tax provisions affecting a business organization when owners sell or exchange ownership interests in the business.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: none
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1276     
Title: relative to a taxpayer's application for a property tax abatement.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
HB636     
Title: relative to forfeiture of property.
Property Owner Position: Against
House Status: IN COMMITTEE
Senate Status: none
==============================================
Full details on all bills above:
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
01/26/2016 at 10:00 AM    LOB Room 208
Title: Title: relative to termination of tenancy.
Summary: This bill reduces the eviction notice from 30 days to 7 days in the following instances:
Failure of tenant to put utilities in their name when required to do so.
Someone staying in the unit who is not on the lease for more than 14 days consecutive or 30 days in a calendar year.
Property Owner Position: 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1370 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
Last session, 2015, we attempted putting this bill through with the addition of unauthorized pets.
There was a large push back about the 7 day notice for unauthorized pets.  This session we are submitting the bill with out the inclusion of unauthorized pets.  
We have also heard that there is an amendment that will be introduced that would force jurisdiction of the eviction case to be the court where the property resides instead of allowing the option for the jurisdiction to be in the court where the property owner resides.  We need to defeat this amendment also.
This is one of the major bills this session and we still expect good sized push back and definitely need every one to show up at hearings and communicate to the committees and legislators to support this very important bill.
New Hampshire law allows a landlord in most residential tenancies to evict tenants by serving the tenants either a 7 days Eviction Notice or a 30 days eviction notice. Presently the 7 days eviction notice can only be used in certain limited circumstances.  Those circumstances are: (a) non-payment of rent  (b) substantial damages caused by the tenant, members of his family or guests (c) behavior by the tenant, members of  his family or guest that adversely affects the health, safety of the landlord or other tenants or failure to accept temporary alternative housing during lead paint abatement.  All other evictions require a 30 days Eviction Notice.
This bill has major advantages for landlords in dealing with the tenants who are purposely breaking the terms of a lease in the two circumstances outlined above, or do not have the financial means to abide by the terms of the lease.
HB1370, if enacted, would add two additional circumstances where a landlord could use a 7 days Eviction Notice.  These two are:
(1) Failure to establish utilities in the tenant’s or terminating utility service when the tenant is required to pay such under the terms of the lease. Please note, that each of the above categories has to be a breach of the lease. For those landlords who do not use leases, or do not prohibit these categories in their leases, they would not be able to use the provisions of this bill, if it became law.
(2) a person staying in the leased premises who is not a party to the lease, and does not have the consent of the landlord, for more than 14 consecutive days or more than 30 days in a calendar year 
If a tenant does not put utilities into his or her name, or terminates utilities or has utilities shut off on them, one of two things could happen.  The first is creating a risk of the building freezing during the winter. The longer the utilities are off, the greater the risk of damage to the building. The second is that the utilities are often transferred into the landlord’s name, and the landlord has to pay for services that the tenant agreed to pay for when the tenant signed the lease. Since a landlord may not terminate utilities on a tenant the landlord then remains stuck paying for a tenant’s utilities which the tenant should be paying per the lease agreement. Reducing the time that tenant had to use someone else’s services, would reduce the loss to the landlord. This is no different than a non-payment of rent, especially since rents are reduced when utilities, principally heat, is not included.
The bill would also allow the tenant to cure these lease violations and stop the eviction by having the utilities billed to the tenant and paying the landlord any costs the landlord incurred in the seven days.  The tenant can only cure this violation three times in the last 12 months, however.
Extra people who move into our apartments, especially if the landlord pays for heat and hot water, use these utilities solely at the expense of the landlord.  The additional people not only increase utility usage but also wear and tear of the apartment, again at the landlord’s expense. These people also are not parties to lease, many times do not know or care about the terms of the lease or the rules and regulations of the landlord, and have nothing to lose if they violate the terms of the lease. Since they are invited into the apartment by the tenant, the police are reluctant to issue a no trespass order. Basically, these extra people are living for free at the landlord’s expense. Some may even consider these people stealing our services.  And what about those cases where an invitee of a tenant takes over the apartment saying they are the tenant but have never signed or agreed to any terms of the lease.  People who are “crashing” at someone's apartment, can be a danger to the landlord and other tenants unless properly screened and approved.
The tenant can also cure the lease violation of an extra person living in the apartment by having the extra person permanently move from the apartment within the seven days. The tenant can only cure this lease violation once.
Landlords often get complaints from other tenants at the property about these issues.  This bill would help landlords to more quickly address the concerns of other tenants in the building & enforce the terms of the lease more efficiently.
This is our bill and we need to fully support its passage.
Here are some thoughts relating to the “surprise amendment” taking away a landlord’s option to hold eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides.
a. Landlords have way way more eviction hearings than a single tenant so the jurisdiction really should be in the court where the property owner resides.
b. Tenants can request jurisdiction be moved to their location which the court can grant if it sees the need.
c. Tenants very often don't even show up anyway. Requesting a hearing was simply a delaying tactic.
d. The landlord is already inconvenienced by the tenant not paying the rent, providing free housing during the eviction process.  If the tenant paid the rent it would not be an issue.  Why make the eviction more difficult for the small businessman (landlord)?
e. The courts have gone electronic, on line, for small claims.  Word is that eviction filing etc will be online in less than a year.
=====================
HB1204, Eviction Workout
01/26/2016 at 11:00 AM    LOB Room 208
Title: Title: relative to payment of rent pending the stay of an eviction proceeding.
Summary: Provide statutory method for allowing eviction work out agreements which became disallowed in District Courts because of the NH Supreme Court Mountain View v. Robson decision in May of 2015.
Property Owner Position: 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1204 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
First thing to say is disregard the bill as originally written.  We have been negotiating with NHLA on the language for this bill & have an agreed upon amendment which rewrites the bill. So do not spend much time reviewing the original bill.  We are calling the amendment the “1/24/16 HB1204 RPOA NHLA Amendment.”.   Please urge legislators to pass the bill as amended by the “1/24/16 HB1204 RPOA NHLA Amendment.”. 
Based upon RSA 540:13c, Landlords and Tenants have entered into agreements in eviction actions based upon non-payment of rent allowing tenants to remain in possession of the leased premises so long as they make payments that are written in the agreement. In many instances, the Landlord and Tenant agree to a schedule where the tenant pays rental arrearages, but is also required to pay future rent as it becomes due.
          These agreements are advantageous to both the Landlord and the Tenant. The Tenant has the opportunity to remain in their home and not be evicted. The Tenant can pay the rental arrears over a period of time that they have negotiated with the Landlord, while the Tenant does not fall further behind in rent. This is particularly helpful to a tenant who fell behind in rent due to a sickness, injury or slowdown in work, who has subsequently overcome these problems.
          The Landlord gains the opportunity to be paid the arrears, and future rent, without the need to file a new eviction action should the tenant not abide by the agreement.
          However, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire, in the case of Mountain View Park LLC v. Robson, decided August 11, 2015, ruled that agreements entered into between Landlords and Tenants in non-payment of rent cases, cannot contain provisions regarding the future payment of rent. Any agreement containing clauses requiring the Tenant to pay future rent submitted by the parties to an eviction action based upon non-payment of rent will have to be rejected by the Circuit Court. This decision takes away from both Landlords and Tenants an effective tool to resolve eviction cases to their mutual benefit. 
HB1204 as we have amended it revises the statute to specifically allow these type of agreements and spells out the procedures for the court to follow if the tenant fails to make payments as required by the agreement.
Please notes that we did some research and found out that  there presently is no statutory guidance or guidance in rules from Judge Kelly's office for the affidavit of non-compliance process.  This means courts could get to this process where the tenant does not make payment and have sympathy for tenant and not order the writ of possession or severely drag this out.  For instance, presently Derry court allows 10 days from landlord’s affidavit of non-compliance (tenant didn’t make payment) for tenant to respond and then it would schedule hearing.  Based on our research many courts would be like Derry which is why we need the extra detail of the later part of this bill.
=====================
HB1196, Higher Damage Amount In Eviction Case
01/26/2016 at 01:00 PM    LOB Room 208
Title: Title: relative to the amount of a money judgment for unpaid rent.
Summary: Increases the amount of unpaid rent a landlord can seek in an eviction action from $1,500 to $5,000.
Property Owner Position: For, If Amended.
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1196 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This bill amend RSA 540:13 by allowing the landlord to ask for a judgment of up to $5,000 of unpaid rent in an eviction action. The bill does not have any limit or does current law, on the amount a tenant can claim against the landlord in a counterclaim in the eviction action. (The upper limit of the amount claimed in a counterclaim most likely will be the maximum amount allowed in civil suits in Circuit Courts).
Although the bill initially sounds like a good idea, on closer inspection it poses a very serious problem.  If a landlord were to claim damages in excess of $1,500, pursuant to RSA 502-A:14, a defendant can ask that the case be transferred to the Superior Court. If this happens, the entire action could be transferred, including the eviction case, and the delays can be substantial. 
Currently, and under the bill, if the tenant files a counterclaim, and the court determines that the amount owed to the tenant equals or exceeds the amount owned by the tenant to the landlord, the judgment in the possessory action will be awarded to the tenant.  The landlord could also be ordered to pay money to the defendant, and still have the defendant in his or her building.
A general recommendation for landlords, from attorneys specializing in landlord tenant law, is not to seek a judgment for unpaid rent in an eviction action to avoid the above.  Commonly called “don’t check the box” (on the landlord and tenant writ).  This is because if the landlord does not ask for a monetary judgment, the tenant cannot file a counterclaim.
We need to seek an amendment to the bill before we can support it. The bill has to allow the possessory action to stay in the Circuit Court and be heard as if there is no claim for unpaid rent or a counterclaim. 
Otherwise, we feel this change to the law could be somewhat of a trap to unwary landlords.
=====================
HB1260, Repeal Authority For Administrative Inspection Warrants
01/28/2016 at 01:40 AM    LOB Room 301
Title: Title: repealing the authority of assessing officials to obtain administrative inspection warrants to complete property appraisals.
Summary: Repeals the authority of assessing officials to obtain administrative inspection warrants to complete property appraisals.
Property Owner Position: For
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1260 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This bill would repeal RSA 74:17 which states “ If the selectmen or assessing officials are unable to obtain consent to enter property for the purpose of obtaining information necessary to complete any inventory under this chapter or appraisal under RSA 75, they may obtain an administrative inspection warrant under RSA 595-B.”
Basically, municipal officials would not be able to obtain administrative search warrants under RSA 595-B.
We would like to know if there has been abuse of the warrant process.  Despite lack of that knowledge some of us feel that in general less intrusion is better.
=====================
SB395, Landlord Required To Install AC Units
01/28/2016 at 09:00 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to minimum housing standards for tenants with health or respiratory issues.
Summary: A bill to require, as a minimum housing standard, that landlords install and maintain air conditioning units for tenants with respiratory or other health related issues requiring air conditioning.
Property Owner Position: Against
Email to Committee: 
Subject: SB395 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This bill would require that all residential landlords have properly working air conditioning units in apartments with tenants who have health issues requiring air conditioning.  Further, the tenant can request that the unit stay in the apartment, even during the winter and when the landlord pays heat.
First, the bill if it became law, could be overly burdensome to many of us.  We would have to buy air conditioners for everyone who claims such a health issue.  It is unclear what type of machine would suffice. Would a standard window unit work without special filters?  Do we have to install central air conditioning in each unit?  Do we have to air condition every room in an apartment?  How do we keep the tenant from stealing the air conditioners when they move out?
Second the bill is poorly drafted and not thought out.  How is it determined who needs an air conditioner?  What about the person with allergies who wants us to pay for the machine so he does not have to?  This bill is ripe for abuse.  The questions above also show the ambiguity in the bill.
What about municipal housing authorities running public housing.  Will they have to install air conditioners?  Who pays for it?
=====================
HB1579, Regulation Of Out Of State Real Estate Brokers
01/28/2016 at 01:45 PM    LOB Room 302
Title: Title: relative to regulation of the practice of out-of-state brokers by the real estate commission.
Summary: A bill regarding the regulation of out of state real estate brokers
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1579 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Notes:
This bill would regulate or amend the regulation of out of state real estate brokers and salespersons in the sale of commercial real estate (all real estate except residences of four units or less).  The out of state person would have to have a specified working relationship with an in state broker.
Talking Points:
=====================
HB1150, UCC Failure to deliver goods
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 302
Title: Title: relative to the penalty for failure to deliver goods under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Summary: A bill requiring triple damages for failure to deliver goods under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1150 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
The Uniform Commercial Code governs the sale of goods along with other commercial transactions.  It does not apply to real estate. This bill would be of some impact to us as apartment owners if a dispute arose over the purchase of goods such as appliances. 
=====================
HB1175, Post-Judgment Real Estate Liens
01/28/2016 at 03:00 PM    LOB Room 208
Title: Title: relative to post-judgment real estate liens.
Summary: Clarification and detailing for RSA 524 liens on real property.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1175 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Notes:
This bill amends RSA 503, the statute on small claims, and RSA 524, the statute on court issued judgments. Current law allows a successful party in a small claims action to place a lien on the party’s real estate by recording a certified copy of the judgment in the registry of deeds where the property is located during the duration of the judgment.
The bill has the same requirements as current law, and it clarifies the procedures to be used to discharge the lien.  It also makes it clear that the lien is effective for 20 years after the cause of action accrued.  In addition, it addresses the procedure that has to be followed once the judgment is satisfied. The bill also give the courts authority to discharge liens when a plaintiff fails to do so, and makes it a class B misdemeanor to induce a court to execute a discharge on the basis of information and statements known to the person to be false.
The bill, if it became law, does not make any substantial substantive changes in the law. It does not add any additional procedures that we can use to collect on judgments from former tenants.
Talking Points:
=====================
SB342, Business Profits Tax Changes
02/02/2016 at 10:00 AM    SH Room 103
Title: Title: making certain changes to business profits tax provisions affecting a business organization when owners sell or exchange ownership interests in the business.
Summary: This bill makes certain changes to business profits tax provisions affecting a business organization when owners sell or exchange ownership interests in the business.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: SB342 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This is another bill that should be review by someone with knowledge of the business profits tax. Not sure we have the knowledge to take a position on the bill.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
HB1276, Propery Tax Abatements
02/03/2016 at 10:00 AM    LOB Room 208
Title: Title: relative to a taxpayer's application for a property tax abatement.
Summary: A bill that would allow taxpayers to raise constitutional issues in tax abatement cases.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1276 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
The bill is a short simple bill that would require municipalities to inform taxpayers that they can raise constitutional issues in abatement procedures.  It would also allow constitutional issues to be heard at abatement hearings. 
If the bill was enacted, we expect that abatement procedures could take longer and end up costing all taxpayers more money to pay staff and whoever hears the cases.  We are also not sure what will be raised as a constitutional issue.
Not sure we have the knowledge to take a position on the bill.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
HB636, Forfeiture Of Property
02/03/2016 at 11:00 AM    LOB Room 212
Title: Title: relative to forfeiture of property.
Summary: This bill would revise the New Hampshire forfeiture laws – the laws that allows the state to take property that is contraband, property obtained due to a commission of a crime, and instrumentalities a person used in the commission of the crime.
Property Owner Position: Against
Email to Committee: 
To: 0
Subject: HB636 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
The state will have the right to seize property that it believes was used in the commission of a crime.
Prosecutors only have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the property is related to the crime, therefore subject to forfeiture.
Law enforcement has a profit motive to pursue forfeitures.
Once property is taken, the burden lies on the innocent owner to defend against the forfeiture.
=====================
==============================================
====================================================

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.