HB1499

Rape kits provide essential evidence, which must be properly handled and preserved in order for victims to have access to to everything which brings them the best chance for justice, and healing.

We don't need to make life harder for renters.

I think it a shame that 9 people are trying to make the housing crisis worse. In 2023 NH had the highest increase in state homelessness. In 2024 it had gone down by 8%. Do we really need it going back up again and then some? Equating someone's immigration status to something as being on the same level as a sex offender is an implication that I honestly find disgusting. Someone's immigration status doesn't make them a criminal. We also are a state with such a high percentage of white people that I can't imagine this would make a big deal to landlords. So, this really does seem like just an excuse to be discriminatory and nothing else. That is not what NH stands for. That's not very reflective of who we are or our state's motto. In what way is this bill "Live Free Or Die"? It isn't. It's a shame and a sham.

This bill fosters immigration bigotry.

I oppose this as someone who has been a social service provider for people experiencing homelessness and who has experienced homelessness myself.

The bill would allow the further repression of tenets in a state known for horrific tenet rights. It would cause only pain and suffering and causing this country to devolve further into the nightmare of fascism. Imagine a landlord pissed at a tenant who continuously reports there lack of repairs to the local government. Instead of fixing these issues the landlord could call ice on this tenet and have them removed by the government, then claiming on insurance that the damage was done by ice. This has already occurred in NY and this bill would make this easier

As a queer person planning to propose to my girlfriend next year, I want us to be able to legally get married in the state we fell in love in. Please support us and queer people everywhere by ensuring our right to marry the people we love isn't a political debate, but a universal right.

Please do not penalize families, especially grandparents. We should be keeping people housed, not trying to evict them. Take care of the residents of New Hampshire.

This bill is not needed. Landlords already have the ability to select their tenants. Please reject this bill.

So the landlord can just assume a person is illegal and evict them? By calling ICE? As for the other criminals, I hope the sponsors of this bill will support transitional housing for people when they are released from prison so they have some place to live.

If we don't support tenants basic rights we will have no low-level workers. We need them in order to function.

January 20, 2026 Chairman Joe Alexander House Housing Committee Subject: Testimony in Opposition to HB 1499 Dear Honorable Chair and members of the committee, For the record my name is Krysten Evans, and I am the Director of Policy for ABLE NH, a statewide disability justice organization that works to protect and expand the civil and human rights of people with disabilities across New Hampshire. I am here today in strong opposition to House Bill 1499. Housing is not a privilege for people with disabilities. It is the foundation that makes survival, health, employment, and community participation possible. HB 1499 undermines that foundation by expanding eviction grounds in ways that are punitive, discriminatory, and deeply harmful to people with disabilities and other marginalized tenants. This bill allows eviction based on immigration status, past criminal convictions within a three year window, or classification under the sex offender registry, regardless of whether the conduct is related to tenancy or poses any current risk. For people with disabilities, this approach is devastating. Disabled people are disproportionately impacted by the criminal legal system, often as a result of unmet mental health needs, lack of access to services, poverty, or criminalization of disability related behavior. Many people with disabilities also have past convictions tied to survival, untreated trauma, or systemic failures, not ongoing harm. HB 1499 does not recognize rehabilitation, stability, or the reality of people’s lives. It imposes a permanent housing penalty for past harm, even when someone is working, complying with treatment, and living peacefully in their community. The bill also raises serious concerns for people with disabilities who live in shared housing, supportive housing, or rely on caregivers or family members to remain housed. HB 1499 allows eviction not just for tenants, but for any occupant of a rented unit. This means a disabled tenant could lose their home because of the legal status or history of someone they depend on for care, support, or survival. That is not accountability. That is collective punishment, and it places people with disabilities at extreme risk of homelessness. Homelessness is not a neutral outcome. For people with disabilities, it is life threatening. It leads to loss of medical care, loss of mobility equipment, interruption of medications, increased risk of violence, institutionalization, and death. New Hampshire already struggles with a severe housing crisis and an overburdened shelter system. HB 1499 does not make our communities safer. It pushes people further into instability, while increasing strain on courts, shelters, hospitals, and emergency systems. Disability justice demands that we ask not only who is punished by a policy, but who is protected. HB 1499 protects landlords from nuance and due process, while exposing disabled people to displacement, trauma, and harm. Safety cannot be built by expanding eviction. Justice cannot be built by making housing conditional on perfection. And dignity cannot exist when people are one accusation or one past mistake away from losing their home. I urge this committee to reject HB 1499. New Hampshire should be investing in stable housing, supportive services, and fair processes, not policies that deepen exclusion and suffering. People with disabilities deserve housing stability, not legislation that makes survival even harder. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. Respectfully submitted, Krysten M. Evans Director of Policy Krysten@ABLENH.org

I am appalled that this bill would give grounds for termination of housing based on immigration status. All people need and deserve safe housing! I strongly OPPOSE this bad bill.

Abraham Lincoln once said that this country will never fall to external forces. If the United States or America collapses it will be because of internal conflict. Our current way of life is proving this to be true. We make an enemy of immigrants when we were once called the mixing pot. Our country was built by immigrants and at the end of the day, only Native Americans can claim they are the original residents of this land. To terminate someone’s housing due to immigration will set us up for a world of hate, a housing crisis never seen before (on top of the one we currently have) and the collapse of civil society as we know it. New Hampshire has a strong history of standing against oppression and corruption. We live free or we die. With the bills you are trying to pass, you are bringing that motto to life. If we do not hold onto our values as humans and remember that we are all the same blood and bones, no one will be free. Freedom for all or freedom for none.

This legislation will be used by landlords to put people on the street who are paying rent on time and obeying all other rules of the lease. This will have many undesirable consequences and create more problems for our cities and towns, and those living in them, not less. It is too vague and has too much opportunity for abuse. Below, some information from the Quaker action group, and their points are valid. Here is another important risk - often people are victimized by others who insert themselves into a person's lives, and putting their housing at risk, by making it easier for landlords to throw them out, adds to the burdens that put more risk on those most vulnerable to exploitation, which is very real - especially disabled, the elderly, women and children households. In fact, that is the strongest reason not to pass this - because it will be ABSOULTELY used by abusers and those persons with ill or predatory intent, to harrass their victims or cause a person who pays ontime and follows all the other rules, to be put out of their home and make the dwelling vacant or to be used by the predatory entity. Abusers use every means to hunt their victims, as well as vengeful ex's and family members. Landlords can use any of the means available now, including HUD rules, to deal with situations. Let’s be clear, landlords can already evict for any health or safety reason. So this just makes it easier-requiring little to no proof. Landlords already have a broad “other good cause” option for eviction that can include failure to disclose information. And nothing obligates a landlord to rent to someone with a criminal record. So this is unnecessary. In 2025, the legislature already made it easier for landlords to evict folks without cause. Why are we continuing to move in this direction, during a housing crisis? Shouldn’t we be trying to keep people housed? Examples, a mixed status family. Mom & kids are US citizens, but dad has an asylum application pending. Do we want them to lose their housing? How about a grandparent who is raising their 19 year old grandchild who was convicted of possession of marijuana? Again, we want them out on the street? Re: “unlawful presence”-this term is a moving target. There is no definition and a definition would be difficult to come by. Immigration status is not fixed or static. Status can change dramatically. There are many interim statuses between “undocumented” and “green card holder.” For example, many young people who have been granted Special Immigrant Juvenile Visas after proving to family courts in New Hampshire that they have been abused, neglected, or abandoned by one or both parents are on a waitlist of six or more years before they can apply for lawful permanent residence. These individuals are lawfully present, have work authorization, and pay taxes. Another example includes individuals granted a U-visa or a bona fide U-applicant status after law enforcement agencies in New Hampshire certified that the applicants have been helpful in prosecuting crimes of violence perpetrated against them in the state. These individuals frequently must wait three to fifteen years before they are eligible for legal permanent residence. Again, these delays are not due to any issue with the individuals’ applications, moral characters, or the law itself, but simply due to administrative waits and limits on visa availability.

This is discriminatory.

As clergy in New Hampshire I see that funds donated by my congregation, which in another time would have gone toward supporting the dignity of families in my care by helping someone purchase durable medical equipment, fill a prescription, pay a heating bill, and helping parents choose Christmas gifts for their kids, can now only be used to help pay rent, or repairs on cars, which now serve as many residents' homes. This resource and other resources are increasingly consumed by the homelessness crisis.  I work in the same building as the day center for Family Promise, and I see the many hours that parents are working and the lengths to which they will go to provide security and housing for their children. As a pastor, I have accompanied people through the legal process to become a permanent resident or citizen, and I have seen how in recent years that process has become even more lengthy, complex, and backlogged because of the delay in the federal government processing immigration applications. This makes immigration status unclear, and it doesn't benefit anyone to increase housing insecurity as well. It does not make our community more secure to take away housing because of the failure of a government process. It does not make sense to increase the burden on the judiciary branch in light of this issue. The work of landlords is not easy, but this bill does not give landlords new options not already provided under law.  It only takes away the requirements of evidence for their claims. This bill would increase the size of government and its cost, it would increase the backlogs and delays for landlords and tenants coming before the court, and it would increase the anxiety of housing insecurity we're already suffering from in New Hampshire.   It's bad for the community.  It does not make us safer.  Please do not support this bill.  

I oppose HB1499. At a time when polling shows us that the number one issue Granite Staters care about is housing, this bill attempts to make it easier for landlords to evict tenants during a housing crisis. There is no offered alternative to fix the housing crisis, increase rental housing, or protect tenants from being kicked out into a marketplace without sufficient housing alternatives. It is shameful and this bill ought to die an immediate death. Please vote ITL on HB1499.

New Hampshire already has a serious homelessness problem, and the solution is to make it easier for landlords to evict people? Being in the U.S. without lawful status is either a misdemeanor or a civil offense, depending on the circumstances. It is not grounds for eviction, any more than jaywalking would be. As for the second part of the bill, if someone has been convicted of a serious crime but is not currently incarcerated (either because they have already done their time, are on parole, on bail, etc.) they need a place to stay like anyone else.

I oppose this bill

This bill creates new grounds for eviction for families where someone is either unlawfully present or has been convicted of a laundry list of crimes. Let’s be clear, landlords can already evict for any health or safety reason. So this just makes it easier-requiring little to no proof. Landlords already have a broad “other good cause” option for eviction that can include failure to disclose information. And nothing obligates a landlord to rent to someone with a criminal record. So this is unnecessary. In 2025, the legislature already made it easier for landlords to evict folks without cause. Why are we continuing to move in this direction, during a housing crisis? Shouldn’t we be trying to keep people housed? Examples, a mixed status family. Mom & kids are US citizens, but dad has an asylum application pending. Do we want them to lose their housing? How about a grandparent who is raising their 19 year old grandchild who was convicted of possession of marijuana? Again, we want them out on the street? Re: “unlawful presence”-this term is a moving target. There is no definition and a definition would be difficult to come by. Immigration status is not fixed or static. Status can change dramatically. There are many interim statuses between “undocumented” and “green card holder.” For example, many young people who have been granted Special Immigrant Juvenile Visas after proving to family courts in New Hampshire that they have been abused, neglected, or abandoned by one or both parents are on a waitlist of six or more years before they can apply for lawful permanent residence. These individuals are lawfully present, have work authorization, and pay taxes. Another example includes individuals granted a U-visa or a bona fide U-applicant status after law enforcement agencies in New Hampshire certified that the applicants have been helpful in prosecuting crimes of violence perpetrated against them in the state. These individuals frequently must wait three to fifteen years before they are eligible for legal permanent residence. Again, these delays are not due to any issue with the individuals’ applications, moral characters, or the law itself, but simply due to administrative waits and limits on visa availability.

I'm testifying in opposition to HB1499. This bill is unfair to renters who have a difficult enough time finding housing on the scale of months: a seven day eviction notice only serves to remover renters from housing without another option in sight. This proposed bill is in blatant disrespect to renters who enliven our local communities

Immigrants are still innocent untol proven guilty, so evicting people based on immigration status allows a landlord to punish someone for a presumed outcome.

As a former landlord, I believe that making eviction easier during a severe housing crisis is wrong. I know how tough it is to be a landlord, but I cannot support this bill, and hope you will vote it ITL.

HB 1499 Is Unnecessary and Harmful It adds broad, status-based eviction grounds unrelated to actual rental performance. It creates legal uncertainty by using an undefined immigration term. It undermines housing stability that supports the workforce and economy. It threatens families with eviction for reasons that do not threaten landlords’ legal rights or community safety. It exacerbates New Hampshire’s housing crisis instead of encouraging sustainable housing policy. Opposition to HB 1499 protects families, supports economic stability, and keeps housing policy focused on real tenancy issues, not punitive status-based criteria.