This Legislative Update is provided to Landlord Connection Members by Nick Norman, Director of Landlord Legislative Affairs
You can contact Nick at nicknorman@yahoo.com
Howdee everyone,
Important Updates:
HB203,
Representation Landlord/Tenant Court
Passed
the full house & has now crossed over to the Senate.
HB315, 7
Days Eviction Notice In Certain Circumstances
Passed
the full house & has now crossed over to the Senate.
HB309,
Removal of Tenant's Property
Victory!
Passed
the full house for a vote. In a while it will work its way to the
Senate.
SB135, 2015 Lead Law
Changes
Victory!
Passed
the full Senate on a roll call vote 24 to 0. Looks like it is
referred to Senate Finance first & then in a while it will work its way to
the house.
HB263, No Residence Restriction
for Sexual Offenders
Victory!
HB263 has been “laid on the
table”. This could mean the bill is over. However,
it could be taken off the table also. Stay
tuned.
Action items this
week:
1. Study SB135, 2015 Lead Law Changes
(full detail below)
This is a very large bill and
yes it requires some study. However, we have a summary and
talking points that walk you through the bill. (With the
removal of several sections there is less to study).
Lastest version (same as last week) is
attached.
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).
Hearings this week:
03/18/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
102
SB235, Condominium Sale Recording &
Financial Disclosure Requirements
Level of Response: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Hearings next week:
None scheduled so far
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. It’s not terribly hard to
get but not straight ahead either.
HB137
Title: relative to homeowner's
insurance.
Property Owner Position:
Yes
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO
LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
HB203
Title: relative to the unauthorized practice
of law.
Property Owner Position:
For
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB175
Title: (NT) establishing a committee to study
improving the efficiency of the financial approval process for housing
subdivisions used by the department of justice.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB208
Title: (NT) relative to allowance sales under
the New Hampshire regional greenhouse gas initiative program.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB308
Title: relative to the supervision of a real
estate office and the duties of a facilitator under the real estate practice
act.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: PASSED /
ADOPTED
Senate Status: none
HB315
Title: relative to termination of
tenancy.
Property Owner Position:
For
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB309
Title: permitting landlords to remove
tenants' property in certain circumstances.
Property Owner Position:
For
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB286
Title: relative to permits issued by building
inspectors.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB353
Title: relative to the governance of
condominium unit owners' associations.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB220
Title: requiring licensure of community
association property managers.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO
LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
HB227
Title: relative to eminent domain on public
lands.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB480
Title: relative to policies for property and
casualty insurance.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: PASSED /
ADOPTED
Senate Status: none
HB481
Title: relative to commercial
insurance.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: PASSED /
ADOPTED
Senate Status: none
HB427
Title: relative to the definition of the New
Hampshire fire code.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB574
Title: relative to regional greenhouse gas
initiative distributions to residential customers.
Property
Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You Decide
House
Status: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
HB653
Title:
prohibiting the use of sex offender registry information for the purpose of
harassing, intimidating, or threatening a registered sexual offender or offender
against children, or any family member, employer or landlord of such
person.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO
LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
HB180
Title: (NT) relative to the definition of
"price or consideration" under the real estate transfer tax and relative to the
exception for transfers by devise under such tax.
Property Owner Position:
For
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
SB135
Title: relative to lead poisoning in
children.
Property Owner Position: Mostly For, Some
Against, Some Neutral, Changes recommended
House Status: none
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB613
Title: relative to governmental records
exempted under the right-to-know law.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
House Status: PASSED / ADOPTED WITH
AMENDMENT
Senate Status: none
HB531
Title: establishing a committee to study
short-term rentals by homeowners and owners of residential
properties.
Property Owner Position: Varied, some For,
some Against, some Neutral
House Status: PASSED /
ADOPTED
Senate Status: none
HB544
Title: allowing the general court to deny a
utility the use of the power of eminent domain.
Property Owner Position: Some For, Some You
Decide
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO
LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
HB680
Title: relative to establishing the rate for
and the collection of the education property tax and establishing a homestead
exemption from the education property tax.
Property Owner Position: Not analyzed.
Believed to be Limited Impact.
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO
LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
SB121
Title: relative to definitions used for
purposes of current use taxation.
Property Owner Position:
Against
House Status: none
Senate Status: REREFERRED
SB235
Title: relative to the condominium act and
the land sales full disclosure act.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
House Status: none
Senate Status: IN
COMMITTEE
HB263
Title: prohibiting residency restrictions on
sex offenders.
Property Owner Position:
Against
House Status: LAID ON
TABLE
Senate Status: none
==============================================
Full details on all bills
above:
HB137, Need analysis
01/15/2015 at 02:00 PM LOB
302
Title: Title: relative to homeowner's
insurance.
Summary:
Property Owner Position:
Yes
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB137
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0137.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
=====================
HB203, Representation Landlord/Tenant
Court
Time not specified SH
100
Title: Title: relative to the unauthorized
practice of law.
Summary: This bill expands the number of
landlords who can represent themselves in the circuit court in eviction cases
and in small claims cases.
Property Owner Position:
For
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S10
Email to Committee:
To: bette.lasky@leg.state.nh.us;
gldaniels@myfairpoint.net; david.pierce@leg.state.nh.us;
sharon.carson@leg.state.nh.us; sam.cataldo@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: HB203
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0203.html
Analysis Stated in Bill: This bill allows
certain persons who are not authorized to practice law to represent a trust that
owns the premises on matters in the circuit court of New Hampshire on landlord
tenant issues.
Talking Points:
Prior to last year’s enactment of RSA 540:30,
landlords who owned rental property in their own names, and not in a
corporation, LLC, Trust or any other entity, could always represent themselves
in evictions. Any other landlord could only represent the legal
entity three times per year.
With the enactment of last years HB590, a
landlord who owns a building titled in a corporation, LLC or a partnership, upon
filing the appropriate affidavits, can represent the entity in eviction
proceedings. However, if the building is owned by a trust, or the
building is operated by a property manager, the three times a year rule
applies. Further, RSA 540:30 does not include small claims actions
where the subject of the law suit is a landlord/tenant
dispute.
HB 203, if enacted, would allow trustees to
represent the trust in eviction actions. It would also permit
property managers to represent the owners of buildings in eviction
actions. The affidavit requirements would apply to trustees and
property managers. In addition, if the bill is enacted, landlords who hold
buildings in corporations, LLCs, partnerships, all with five or less members and
property managers can represent the building owners in small claims cases where
the subject of the suit is a landlord tenant dispute.
With many people transferring their
properties into trusts, and hiring property managers, this bill would simply put
these landlords in the same position as the landlords who have their buildings
in 5 or less member LLCs, corporations, or partnerships. It would
save the expensive cost of hiring an attorney for a relatively straight forward
matter, especially with non-payment of rent cases. Cases may even
move faster without professional litigators involved. The same
holds true for small claims actions, which in landlord tenant matters are either
for unpaid rent or damages.
This bill was proposed by the Rental Property
Owners Association, and is sponsored by one of our members who is a legislator.
We are very much for this bill and ask all landlords to call and email
legislators. Further we need as many people as possible to attend
the committee hearings on the bill.
=====================
HB175,
01/21/2015 at 01:30 PM LOB
302
Title: Title: (NT) establishing a committee
to study improving the efficiency of the financial approval process for housing
subdivisions used by the department of justice.
Summary:
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB175
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0175.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
=====================
HB208, Repealing The New Hampshire Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative
Time not specified SH
100
Title: Title: (NT) relative to allowance
sales under the New Hampshire regional greenhouse gas initiative
program.
Summary: We have heard concerns related to
REGI, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. However, we don't have
specific input for you on this bill.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S38
Email to Committee:
To: 0; 0; andy.sanborn@leg.state.nh.us;
martha.fullerclark@leg.state.nh.us; jeb.bradley@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: HB208
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0208.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
If you are familiar with concerns related to
RGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiativem, please contact & update us so we
can get the info to other property owners.
One of our analysis team put together this
info:
This bill repeals the greenhouse initiative
that was passed a while back. We should support this bill. The fiscal impact
statement says it all. It is very expensive. The money saved comes from our
pockets. Government never generates revenue, they take it from the
citizens.
The biggest greenhouse gas is water vapor.
That is 95 percent of all greenhouse gases. All the other greenhouse gases
(including CO2) make up the remaining 5%. We can do very little to
control the water vapor.
You can read an interesting study that
refutes man made global warming here:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Public Utilities
Commission and the Department of Environmental Services state this bill, as
introduced, will decrease state restricted revenue and expenditures by
$8,000,000 in FY 2015, $20,500,000 in FY 2016, $25,500,000 in FY 2017,
$28,000,000 in FY 2018, and $28,000,000 in FY 2019, and decrease local revenue
by $2,000,000 in FY 2015 and each year thereafter. This bill may have an
indeterminable fiscal impact impact on county and local expenditures, and county
revenues.
=====================
HB308, Supervision Of Real Estate Offices And
Duties Of A Facilitator
01/28/2015 at 10:00 AM LOB
302
Title: Title: relative to the supervision of
a real estate office and the duties of a facilitator under the real estate
practice act.
Summary: Limited Impact. Not
analyzed yet to allow time on more critical bills.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB308
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0308.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
none developed so far.
=====================
HB315, 7 Days Eviction Notice In Certain
Circumstances
Time not specified SH
100
Title: Title: relative to termination of
tenancy.
Summary: This bill reduces the eviction
notice from 30 days to 7 days in the following instances:
Someone staying in the unit who is not on the
lease for more than 14 days consecutive or 30 days in a calendar
year.
Pets or animals that are not in the
lease.
Failure of tenant to put utilities in their
name when required to do so.
Property Owner Position:
For
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S10
Email to Committee:
To: bette.lasky@leg.state.nh.us;
gldaniels@myfairpoint.net; david.pierce@leg.state.nh.us;
sharon.carson@leg.state.nh.us; sam.cataldo@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: HB315
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0315.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
We need everyone to show up at the hearing in
favor of this bill & call and write to legislators to support this important
bill. Stay tuned for changes. We have met with NHLA
who has proposed changes. Some we agree with, some need further
work.
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.
HB 315, if enacted, would add three
additional circumstances where a landlord could use a 7 days Eviction
Notice. These three are:
(1) 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
(2) having a pet or animal in the premises in
violation of a lease or rental agreement
(3) 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.
This bill has major advantages for landlords
in dealing with the tenants who are purposely breaking the terms of a lease in
the three circumstances outlined above, or do not have the financial means to
abide by the terms of the lease.
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.
Many of us charge more rent for people with
pets in order to offset the damage some pets do to our buildings, and since the
rent is higher, charge a higher security deposit equal to one month’s
rent. The tenant who sneaks a pet in without our consent is
depriving us of the ability to charge the higher rent and obtain more security
deposit from that tenant to offset the extra wear and tear and damage from the
pet. It also makes it much more difficult to collect the additional rent from
other tenants who have pets once they hear about what the “sneak” did at no
additional cost.
Unauthorized dogs could bite someone,
triggering a lawsuit. The landlord could have his insurance policy cancelled
just by the dog being there, especially in the case of “aggressive”
breeds. This has forced the property to go on surplus insurance at
a much greater cost with less coverage.
Pets can be destructive. The
longer the pet is in an apartment, the more destruction it can do.
For instance, a cat clawing on the wood work or using the carpets as a
litter box, will cause more damage the longer it is in the apartment. Also if
the animal has flees, and sooner that animal is out of the building, the less
likely the fleas will spread to other units. (There seems to be a direct
correlation between the people who sneak a pet in, and the people who do not
take proper care of their pet). Reducing the time it takes to
evict the tenant, by 23 days, substantially reduces the time the pets can damage
the rented unit.
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.
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.
=====================
HB309, Removal of Tenant's
Property
01/28/2015 at 01:45 PM LOB
208
Title: Title: permitting landlords to remove
tenants' property in certain circumstances.
Summary: The landlord shall be able to remove
property (without penalty) that creates a hazard or blocks access to common
areas. No notice is required.
The Landlord shall be able to remove property
with notice for property such as unregistered vehicles, or anything else
prohibited in the lease, provided that two notices are given at least 24 hours
apart.
Property Owner Position:
For
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H10
Email to Committee:
To:
HouseJudiciaryCommittee@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB309
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0309.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
We need everyone to show up at the hearing in
favor of this bill & call and write to legislators to support this important
bill. Stay tuned for changes. We have met with NHLA
who has proposed changes most of which we agree with,
Currently, RSA 540-A:3 III specifically
prohibits a landlord directly or indirectly denying a tenant access to the
tenant’s personal property other than by proper judicial process.
This would include having a tenant’s vehicle or other property towed or
removed from the landlord’s property. Without this bill, if the
landlord towed a tenant’s vehicle to comply with local ordinances or to provide
access for emergency vehicles or to stop tenant’s car from blocking the driveway
or another tenants parking spot, etc, etc, the present statute would subject a
landlord to a $1,000 fine, plus a $1,000 a day fine for each day the tenant does
not have his or her car after a court issues an order. If the car
was towed, the landlord, to stop the $1000/day fines, would have to pay all
towing and storage fees. The landlord would also be subject to
paying the defendant’s attorney fees and costs.
HB 309 would eliminate this risk for
landlords in certain limited circumstances. If the bill is enacted, and a
tenant’s property is in a travel lane, common driveway, fire lane, the entrance
or exit to any of these, or is in the entrance to a parking area or blocks a
dumpster , then a landlord could legally remove a tenant’s property without
notice to the tenant, and at the tenant’s expense.
For less egregious scenarios the bill would
also allow a landlord to remove tenant’s property, after two notices to the
tenant, with the second notice not to be delivered to the tenant until 24 hours
after the first notice. These scenarios include if the tenant’s
property is located in a posted no parking area, is an unregistered or
uninspected motor vehicle, is leaking fluids that are damaging the parking
surface or are an environmental hazard, or is parked or stored in a manner that
is in violation of the lease.
We need everyone’s full support for this
bill. If passed, it will aid us in maintaining our properties, and in removing
junk from our parking lots & handling tenants who just flatly refuse to
follow their lease requirements regarding parking. The bill is
necessary in order to keep our properties clean and safe & to legally comply
with local ordinance and zoning laws which require removal of certain offensive
property.
The bill also offers protection for tenants
who don't realize they are breaking a lease requirement. Once notified they
would have the ability to correct the problem or the landlord will have the
authority to correct it.
=====================
HB286, Permits Issued By Building
Inspectors
01/29/2015 at 02:00 PM LOB
306
Title: Title: relative to permits issued by
building inspectors.
Summary: Limited Impact. Not
analyzed.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H07
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseExecutiveDepartmentsandAdministration@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB286
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0286.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Provided in update only to give notice to
those that may be affected.
=====================
HB353, Condo Association Voting &
Meetings
02/03/2015 at 10:00 AM LOB
302
Title: Title: relative to the governance of
condominium unit owners' associations.
Summary: This bill would replace
a number of sections RSA 356-B, the statute governing
condominiums. The bill is very important to developers, attorneys
for developers, and attorneys for condo associations.
The bill seeks to modify the Voting
Procedures and Meetings for Condo Owners Associations set forth in RSA 356
B. It shall incorporate E-mail notifications, Video and Telephonic
conferencing.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB353
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0353.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
This bill will add additional cost to all
condo associations to update bi-laws within 2 year time
frame.
We have not fully analyzed this bill.
If it affects you dig deeper.
=====================
HB220, Licensing Community Association
Managers
02/10/2015 at 02:30 PM LOB
302
Title: Title: requiring licensure of
community association property managers.
Summary: Requiring community associations to
become licensed with the state of NH. Similar to RE license or other contractor
license.
Establish a Licensing Board/ Commission to
oversee management of this requirement.
Property Management License will be separate
from a Real Estate Sales license as is a current requirement.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB220
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0220.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
The bill may burden some small condo
projects. Such as an association with 2 or 3 units. It will however increase the
amount of responsibility and competency in carrying out duties of the
manager.
Will reduce the requirement of Real Estate
Sales License to acquire property management license.
This bill makes no mention of those that
manage their own units. Assumption it that they will be exempt from this
requirement.
Note that some of our analysis team was
against this bill.
=====================
HB227, Eminent Domain On Public
Lands
Time not specified LOB
102
Title: Title: relative to eminent domain on
public lands.
Summary: none developed so
far.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S27
Email to Committee:
To: 0; dboutin1465@comcast.net;
bette.lasky@leg.state.nh.us; nancy.stiles@leg.state.nh.us;
molly.kelly@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: HB227
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0227.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
none developed so far.
=====================
HB480, Insurance/Criminal
Offense
02/12/2015 at 10:30 AM LOB
302
Title: Title: relative to policies for
property and casualty insurance.
Summary: Would ban coverage for a fine or
penalty for a criminal offense, but allow payment of defense
costs.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB480
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0480.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Requested by the insurance department.
If the fines were covered by insurance then
the punishment for the offense would have little affect.
Punishment should not be paid by a 3rd
party.
=====================
HB481, Mortgage Guarantee
Insurance
02/12/2015 at 10:45 AM LOB
302
Title: Title: relative to commercial
insurance.
Summary: The bill would clarify that RSA
417-C would not apply to mortgage guarantee insurance.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB481
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0481.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
After the housing collapse of 2008, PMI
insurance companies suffered losses and are making changes to lower their
risk.
=====================
HB427, Adopting 2015 Fire Code
Regs
02/12/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
306
Title: Title: relative to the definition of
the New Hampshire fire code.
Summary: Regarding the definition of the
state fire code. Simply change from a 2009 version of the Uniform
Fire Code to a 2015 version.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H07
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseExecutiveDepartmentsandAdministration@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB427
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0427.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
How will this impact sprinkler requirements?
State fire marshal has recommended the state
adopt changes to the Life Safety Code as follows:
a. Atriums Used As Part of
Separated Occupancies
b.Vestibules Separating
Normally Unoccupied Spaces from Exit Enclosures
c. New Occupant Load Factors
d. Alcohol-Based Hand-Rub
Dispensers (ABHR)
e. Stairway Video Monitoring
in High-Rise Buildings
f. Life Safety Evaluations
in Assembly Occupancies
g. Multiple-Level Buildings
in Day Care and Board and Care Occupancies
h. Disguised Doors in Health
Care
i. Reduced Corridor Width in
Nursing Homes
j. Ambulatory Health Care
Rewrite
=====================
HB574, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
Distributions
02/12/2015 at 02:30 PM LOB
304
Title: Title: relative to regional greenhouse
gas initiative distributions to residential customers.
Summary: Eliminates regional greenhouse gas
initiative, RGGI, distributions to residential electric
ratepayers.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H24
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseScienceTechnologyandEnergy@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB574
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0574.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
There are varying opinions on
RGGI.
If you are familiar with concerns related to
RGGI Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, please contact & update us so we
can get the info to other property owners.
One of our analysis team put together this
info:
There are bills attempting to eliminate RGGI.
The fiscal impact statement of that bill, HB208, says it all. It is very
expensive. The money saved comes from our pockets. Government never generates
revenue, they take it from the citizens.
The biggest greenhouse gas is water vapor.
That is 95 percent of all greenhouse gases. All the other greenhouse gases
(including CO2) make up the remaining 5%. We can do very little to
control the water vapor.
You can read an interesting study that
refutes man made global warming here:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
RGGI is a cap-and trade system for reducing
co2 from power plants. Auctioning began in 2008.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Public Utilities
Commission and the Department of Environmental Services state this bill, as
introduced, will decrease state restricted revenue and expenditures by
$8,000,000 in FY 2015, $20,500,000 in FY 2016, $25,500,000 in FY 2017,
$28,000,000 in FY 2018, and $28,000,000 in FY 2019, and decrease local revenue
by $2,000,000 in FY 2015 and each year thereafter. This bill may have an
indeterminable fiscal impact impact on county and local expenditures, and county
revenues.
Here is a varying opinion:
Funds from these auctions pay for energy
efficient programs such as weatherization of homes.
Bills have been introduced to pull out of
this initiative all together as NJ has done. However, NH receives about
18million/ year in carbon allowances. Most is paid out in ratepayer rebates,
with the remainder used for weatherizing homes.
NH has one of the highest electric rates of
the country. This will not only drive away company investment in NH but also
it's residents.
=====================
HB653, Prohibited use of the Sex Offender
Registry
02/12/2015 at 03:00 PM LOB
204
Title: Title: prohibiting the use of sex
offender registry information for the purpose of harassing, intimidating, or
threatening a registered sexual offender or offender against children, or any
family member, employer or landlord of such person.
Summary: Information in the registry shall
not be used to harass the registrar, his/her family, employer or
landlord.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H26
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCriminalJusticeandPublicSafety@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB653
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0653.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Violators shall be guilty of a class A
misdemeanor.
This bill may offer limited protection to a
landlord that has rented to a sex offender.
=====================
HB180, Real Estate Transfer Tax, Clarify
“Contractual” Transfer
02/17/2015 at 10:00 AM LOB
202
Title: Title: (NT) relative to the definition
of "price or consideration" under the real estate transfer tax and relative to
the exception for transfers by devise under such tax.
Summary: This bill attempts to clarify a
“contractual” transfer of Real Estate.
Property Owner Position:
For
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H28
Email to Committee:
To: 0
Subject: HB180
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0180.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
This bill, if enacted, would marginally
clarify what is price or consideration to base the amount of tax to be paid in
real estate transactions. Currently, non-contractual transfers,
which basically are gifts, are not taxed. The bill would add to
the definition of price and consideration, which the amount of the taxes to be
paid are based upon, the words “in a contractual transfer.” The bill is merely
housekeeping, and does not change anything.
This bill will help the banks when they take
a deed in lieu of foreclosure. They won’t have to pay the transfer stamps. This
would be a good bill to amend transferring a property in to another entity for
estate planning/asset protection. Not having to pay transfer stamps if it is
still done for the above reasons.
See if we could amend the bill to help with
transfer of property into LLC, LP…
=====================
SB135, 2015 Lead Law
Changes
02/17/2015 at 01:00 PM LOB
101
Title: Title: relative to lead poisoning in
children.
Summary: This is a very large bill with many
different sections all with the intent to reduce childhood lead
poisoning. There has been stake holder meetings for several months
with some landlord representation resulting in this legislation.
The stake holders continue to meet regularly. We’re sure
that there will be continued push and more lead legislation for a long time
coming. We are mostly for or are neutral on this
bill.
The Conservation Law Foundation, CLF,
specifically, Tom Irwin, has specifically been at the forefront of pulling
together the interested parties hearing all sides and working with all
stakeholders to draft this language. Tom has worked well with us
to hear and incorporate our input.
The bill is large and is divided into several
sections. Therefore for clarity in understanding the bill, our
analysis will walk you through the bill in order section by
section.
Property Owner Position: Mostly For, Some
Against, Some Neutral, Changes recommended
Link to Committee Info:
Email to Committee:
To:
Subject: SB135
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/SB0135.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Section 1: Laboratory
Reporting
Property Owner Position:
Neutral
This section relates to having DHHS,
Department of Health & Human Services track and report screening
rates. That is how many children are being screened (asked
questions) and or tested each year. The screening rates have
always been way below long established state guidelines.
Landlords stand aside on the issue of
screening so we have no position on this section.
Section 2: Capillary Blood
Testing
Property Owner Position:
For
“Capillary Blood Test” is what you might call
a finger prick test that draws a few drops of blood as opposed to a venous test
which actually draws blood from a vein using a needle.
Capillary blood tests are said to have less
accuracy than a venous draw. Partly because the portable test
modules are not as accurate as a sample sent to a lab and partly because the
people operating the capillary test machines are not trained medical
staff. Occasionally, lead on the persons finger ends up in the
sample.
We have been a push for parents and landlords
to receive ALL test results of ANY level. This is because earlier
detection allows both family and landlord to take well thought out reasonable
measures to prevent the lead exposure before an entire lead abatement order
becomes issued if the level reaches 10ug/dl.
DHHS is extremely reluctant to take on the
reporting responsibility for values below 5ug/dl ostensibly because of the
expected enormous work load required and no budget for it. The
have to find contact info for the landlord whereas the parent contact info is
already on the reporting forms. Also past results show there would
be about 1000/y reportings required at 5 and above. We don’t know
how many reports would be required at less than 5. Presumably way
more.
Note that the version passing the Senate
committee adds a duty to the study commission to look at the issue of reporting
results <5ug dl.="" span="">
This provision of section 2 advises the
family to get a venous draw test so they get an accurate picture and eliminate
“false alarms”. It also recommends that the tenant inform the
landlord which is in part accomplishing what we have been asking for.
It further recommends the tenant contact the
landlord rather than do anything regarding the lead hazards on their own.
This moves again in a direction we have been asking for. It
makes some movement toward solving the issue of tenants creating the lead
hazards.
Section 3: Child Lead
Screening
Property Owner Position:
Neutral
This section stresses health care providers
are responsible for screening for lead and to follow state guidelines.
If they don’t meet the guidelines by 2017 then DHHS will adopt rules to
require them to do so.
Landlords stand aside on the issue of
screening so we have no position on this section.
Section 4: Property Owner
Notification of Elevated BLL
Property Owner Position:
For
The latest revision as the bill leaves the
Senate committee is that landlords are only notified of venous draw tests and
not capillary tests. This is a little watered down from the
original bill where we would be notified of both venous and capillary
test. (See below about DHHS’s resistance to the work load of
giving these notices).
Something is better than nothing and
presently we are not getting any notices in the range of 5-9.9ug/dl so this
section is quite good for us in that when we are notified of low levels of lead
we can work with the tenant family and be proactive at taking all precautions to
eliminate the poisoning in a common sense way before it escalates to higher
levels which will more greatly harm the child and trigger a lead abatement
order. Many times the tenant family and the landlord can work
together in a common sense way before an order is triggered and solve the issue
easily before the extreme expense of an order is triggered.
The back ground for this is that there has
been a request for DHHS to notify property owners and parents at ANY
level. The thinking which we agree with is that the earlier
everyone is notified the sooner everyone can take measures to be sure the
child’s BLL does not rise and only goes down from here. DHHS wants
to be able to give notice at any level but their old software system and some
test methods are not as reliable when readings are <5ug a="" able="" accurately="" actually="" almost="" an="" and="" anyone="" are="" at="" be="" behind="" but="" change="" could="" create="" data.="" data="" dl="" do="" does="" get="" give="" have="" hold="" hour="" in="" it.="" just="" levels.="" like="" lower="" modern="" nbsp="" not="" notice="" number="" s="" say="" says="" simple="" simply="" software="" something="" span="" spreadsheet="" systems="" that="" the="" their="" they="" time.="" to="" towards="" update="" we="" where="" why="" working="">
Because capillary testing at low levels is
less reliable and because of the data complications expressed in the above
paragraph, there is language like “the data is deemed reliable by the
department”. When their systems are updated in the future this
language allow them to report lower numbers with out having to make yet another
change in the state law.
Also DHHS is extremely resistant to
notifications below 5ug/dL primarily because they can not handle the work
load. Part of the issue is the unreliability of capillary tests,
(operators of test are often not medical staff and actually introduce lead to
the skin surface before the pin prick is made).
Part of the issue, harder to solve, is the
extra time spent for DHHS to find the owner of the property. There
are about 1000 BLL levels reported per year from 5-10 ug/DL. Less
than 5 is believed to be a much larger number.
All landlords we have spoken to are for this
section.
Section 4: Parent Notification
of Elevated BLL
Property Owner Position:
For
This section is quite good for us as well in
that when parents are notified of low levels of lead they will usually become
proactive at taking all precautions to eliminate the poisoning before it
escalates to higher levels which will more greatly harm the child and trigger a
lead abatement order. Many times the tenant family and the
landlord can work together in a common sense way before an order is triggered
and solve the issue easily before the extreme expense of an order is triggered.
Notice that the parents get reporting of both
capillary and venous testing while landlords only get notification of venous
testing.
All landlords we have spoken to are for this
section.
(Similar notes as section on Landlord
Notification above).
Section 6: Civil
Suits
Property Owner Position:
Against
May be upgraded to Neutral if
amended.
Technically, this section does not change the
understanding of civil liability so we’re not sure why it is
needed.
The Senate committee amendment does add a
sentence to address the subsequent repairs concern. (Previously flagged as an
issue).
We are suggesting the following change to the
tenant responsibility side of this section.
"Evidence of disturbance of lead based
substances by the tenant, his guests, invitees, or anyone else he or she brings
into the leased premises, or the tenant’s pets shall be admissible evidence.
Failure of the tenant to notify the landlord, as required in written lease or
rental agreement, of any peeling, chipping, chalking, cracking or disturbance of
lead based substances shall also be admitted into evidence."
If both of these changes survive in the
amendment we would upgrade our position from against to
neutral.
Section 7: Lead Screening
Commission & Essential Maintenance Practices Task Force
In the amendment both would be combined into
one commission with subcommittees one for Lead Screening and the other for
Essential Maintenance Practices Task
Force
Lead Screening Commission
Property Owner Position:
Neutral
Essential Maintenance Practices Task
Force
Property Owner Position:
For
Basically, the committee would set up a
standard of care to be followed by all owners of such property. The committee is
to study similar programs in other states, Vermont is the primary example, work
with public health officials in formulating such a program, and look into
incentives for compliance. 14 people are to be appointed to the committee from
various occupations related to public health and rental
housing.
The fundamental idea here if such a program
would be put in place is likely that rental property owners would need to submit
an annual report stating that they have inspected the rental property and fixed
any lead hazards using lead safe techniques. Also there could
easily be a program requiring old leaded windows not yet replaced to at least be
fitted with a system of simple vinyl strips and window will inserts to eliminate
the friction surfaces of the leaded portion of the windows.
In exchange for this standard of care the
property owner would receive a reduction in liability in lead law suits.
At the stake holders meetings, an attorney representing interest of trial
lawyers said the legal protection for landlords will be killed by the trial
lawyers. So the “carrot” portion of this proposal definitely needs
substantial work.
At one of our landlord meetings it was
suggested that to get a limit in liability landlords should just keep a
maintenance log and that the landlord’s property maintenance log
be admissible evidence in defending landlord liability. This idea eliminates the
beauracracy and still give us possibility of some protection.
Also what if tenant denies us access to make
repairs. Law should state that tenant has to give landlord access, similar to
bedbug provision.
Some background:
As of late, I have been involved with the
lead stake holders meetings that resulted in this legislation.
Most of the stake holders wanted to simply put an Essential Maintenance
Program in place with this bill. My strong comment to them was
that more time was needed to analyze and come up with a plan that landlords
could agree with. They decided to take my advice and create a task
force instead. Most but not 100% of the landlords I speak with are
in favor of this section because it will give landlord’s voice in the process
& more time in designing the Essential Maintenances Program.
Forcing in place a program that was not well thought out could have been
very detrimental to landlords.
The commission membership at our
recommendation was raised from 1 to 4 landlord representatives which addresses
our major concern.
The Child care member was amended to be from
a property pre1978. Which is one of the concerns we raised.
We recommend a few modifications to this
section of the bill.
Should an in home day care be included from a
property pre1978?
Since there most likely will be a proposed
essential maintenance practices program coming from the committee that may
become law, we should have some way to review the proposal and have input on it
before the committee makes its final recommendation to the legislature.
We ask that the meeting minutes and proposed essential practices be
posted on a website of the general court & the general public be allowed to
make written comments to the committee and such comments be
reviewed by the committee before it makes any recommendations to the
legislature.
We also recommend that a minority report
option be made available for the final report.
There is also one change we will be asking
for on the appointing of a landlord representative.
Notes some other good
things.
This version as amended by the Senate
committee adds some duties to the commission including:
VI. The commission shall explore and examine
options for assisting property owners in the abatement of lead-based paint
hazards.
VIII. The commission shall assess the
feasibility and benefits of requiring the department to provide notice to
landlords and parents pursuant to RSA 130-A:6-a and RSA 130-A:6-b when a child
has been found to have a blood lead level less than 5 micrograms per
deciliter.
Previous Section on Child Care License/Permit
Suspension, Revocation, Denial
has been removed.
Previous sections related to RSA 540-A
prohibited acts
has been removed.
Previous section related to Building Permits
To Require RRP If Applicable
has been removed.
Section 8: Repeal
commission on Completion
Section 9: Effective Dates For
Different Sections
=====================
HB613, Right To Know Law
Exemptions
02/19/2015 at 10:45 AM LOB
208
Title: Title: relative to governmental
records exempted under the right-to-know law.
Summary: Exemptions to include names and
addresses contained in license applications.
Property Owner Position: You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H10
Email to Committee:
To:
HouseJudiciaryCommittee@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB613
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0613.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Appears to clarify current
exemptions.
Some of us are for this
bill.
=====================
HB531, Short-Term Rentals Study
Committee
02/19/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
302
Title: Title: establishing a committee to
study short-term rentals by homeowners and owners of residential
properties.
Summary: 1. Seek to establish a committee to
study and make recommendations regarding short-term (vacation) rentals by
homeowners.
2. Evaluate the effect this will have on the
traditional lodging market.
Property Owner Position: Varied, some For,
some Against, some Neutral
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H43
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCommerceAndConsumerAffairs@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB531
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0531.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Short term rentals are not defined in the
bill, nor is it clear what types of properties, or the types of rentals the
committee is supposed to study. Are rooms in a house rented out as a Bed and
Breakfast subject to this study? See Airbnb.com. Or
are single family residences rented out for a month at a time or less subject to
this study.
Homeowners have been renting short-term,
vacation properties long before hotel chains and vacation resorts came on scene.
We don't believe this market is so saturated with homeowner rentals to create a
problem. It is this level of competition that creates benefit for the
consumer.
=====================
HB544, Eminent Domain by
Utilities
02/19/2015 at 01:15 PM LOB
304
Title: Title: allowing the general court to
deny a utility the use of the power of eminent domain.
Summary: The bill would deny a utility, as
defined in RSA-362, the powers of eminent domain unless the proposed taking was
presented to the legislature (General Court) and the legislature did not ban the
taking.
Property Owner Position: Some For, Some You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H24
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseScienceTechnologyandEnergy@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB544
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0544.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Some of us are for this bill because it
protects property rights.
We feel that property owners should not loose
land or rights through eminent domain without a full restitution (including
appraisals & atty's fees) and careful research on the merits and benefits of
the acquisition.
=====================
HB680, Homestead Exemption
02/20/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
202
Title: Title: relative to establishing the
rate for and the collection of the education property tax and establishing a
homestead exemption from the education property tax.
Summary: Not analyzed yet
Property Owner Position: Not analyzed.
Believed to be Limited Impact.
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H28
Email to Committee:
To: 0
Subject: HB680
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0680.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Not analyzed yet
=====================
SB121, Current Use
Taxation
03/02/2015 at 09:45 AM SH
103
Title: Title: relative to definitions used
for purposes of current use taxation.
Summary: This bill will allow excavated land
to be considered open space. Therefore, allowing more landowners to apply for
current use tax savings.
Property Owner Position:
Against
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S17
Email to Committee:
To: dboutin1465@comcast.net; 0;
chuck.morse@leg.state.nh.us; andy.sanborn@leg.state.nh.us;
dalas@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: SB121
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/SB0121.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
Towns may bare the cost of civil engineers to
determine “angle of repose” but, those costs should be paid by the
applicant.
The reduction of taxable land within a
municipality will result in higher tax bills for taxpayers.
The revenue is not lost to the town as it
will be picked up by all local taxpayers. The town will likely pick up
additional revenue when the land is eventually converted from current
use.
Excavated land where the “angle of repose”
creates the necessity of civil engineering to ensure it's safety, probably goes
against the intent of open space.
This bill would increase tax burden on
taxpayers in general for the benefit of the few.
=====================
SB235, Condominium Sale Recording &
Financial Disclosure Requirements
03/18/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
102
Title: Title: relative to the condominium act
and the land sales full disclosure act.
Summary: This bill makes revisions to the
condominium act in regard to recording requirements and financial
disclosures.
Property Owner Position: LimitedImpact; You
Decide
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S27
Email to Committee:
To: 0; dboutin1465@comcast.net;
bette.lasky@leg.state.nh.us; nancy.stiles@leg.state.nh.us;
molly.kelly@leg.state.nh.us; ;
Subject: SB235
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/SB0235.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
The bill does not seem to have any direct
effect on the residential rental market.
=====================
HB263, No Residence Restriction for Sexual
Offenders
01/29/2015 at 11:00 AM LOB
204
Title: Title: prohibiting residency
restrictions on sex offenders.
Summary: This bill, if it became law would
prohibit any political subdivisions of the state including counties, cities,
towns, villages, and special districts such as school districts, water
districts, park districts, and airport districts, from enacting housing
restrictions of sexual offenders. Further once the bill becomes
law, all such restrictions that are in existence, will become
unenforceable.
Property Owner Position:
Against
Link to Committee Info:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H26
Email to Committee:
To:
~HouseCriminalJusticeandPublicSafety@leg.state.nh.us
Subject: HB263
Link to Bill Text:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2015/HB0263.html
Analysis Stated in Bill:
Talking Points:
This appears to be bad for our industry
because it moves sexual offenders towards having a protected class
status. If a local jurisdiction cannot use sex offender status
restrictions, then the next step could be that the property owner/landlord
cannot use that for screening.
So, if a town enacts an ordinance that sex
offenders cannot live within 100 yards of a school, that restriction would not
be enforceable under this bill. Although such a restriction would be to protect
one of our most venerable groups – children. The bill does not
consider if a restriction is reasonable, and does have a clear goal of
protecting those we all can agree cannot protect themselves.
It is also an example of the
state telling local communities, and the people of those communities, how to run
their community which we are usually against.
The real problem seems to lie with where to
draw the line between minor offenses and major offenders.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.