A bill to protect tenants from unreasonable evictions had little chance this year and died in committee on Monday, but was unexpectedly revived Wednesday and sent to the House for consideration.
Supporters on both sides of the issue say so-called “just cause eviction” legislation has repeatedly stalled in recent years and is still a long way from final approval. But Wednesday’s vote by the House Economic Affairs Committee spells trouble for the final days of the legislative session, a change that tenants’ rights advocates welcomed.
“We’ll see how this bill plays out throughout the legislative process,” said Ninfa Amador-Hernandez, a policy analyst at immigration advocacy group CASA. “But a key component of this bill is protecting families — and right now, that’s critical.”
House Bill 774 is the latest version of the legislation, also known as “just cause evictions.” Such legislation would allow local jurisdictions to require that a landlord who wants to cancel a lease must notify the tenant of the reason for specific reasons listed in the bill. These may include issues such as non-payment of rent, disorderly conduct or breach of lease agreement.
Landlords and housing developers say the legislation will exacerbate an already “over-regulated” housing market and be unfriendly to future housing projects.
Senate leadership, including Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore), understands developers’ concerns, especially as state leaders are pushing for new development to address a 96,000-unit housing shortage.
Just cause deportation legislation passed the House in 2024, but the bill never came up for a vote in the Senate Judiciary Proceedings Committee. Last year, the judicial process took the lead but sought to amend the act to let local jurisdictions choose between rent control measures or just cause evictions.
The goal is to find a middle ground between accommodating developers, who feel they are burdened by too many local regulations, and protecting tenants from unreasonable evictions. But the “poison pill amendment” caused renters’ advocates to back off, and the conversation was once again stalled in judicial proceedings.
Many suspected a repeat this session, as HB 744 and its Senate counterpart, Senate Bill 462, languished in committees after hearings in February.
When Economic Affairs Chairwoman Kriselda Valderrama (D-Prince George) called for a yes vote on the bill on Monday, it did not pass – only nine of the committee’s 20 representatives voted in favor. Seven people voted against, one abstained and three were absent.
“This bill is basically dead,” said Del. April Ross (R-Frederick and Carroll), who was not present for Monday’s vote but said she would oppose the legislation.
On Wednesday, Del. Veronica Turner (D-George Prince) spoke out against the legislation on Monday, calling for the bill to be reconsidered. She joined 10 others who voted in favor of the bill, two who voted against it, one who voted absentee and six who were absent, including several Republicans who were present at the beginning of the session but withdrew from discussion of the bill.
“We expressed our frustration with the process,” Ross, one of the delegates who walked out, said.
HB 774 will now go to the full House for consideration, but if approved by the House, it will return to the judicial process — assuming it doesn’t just stay in Senate rules, where it will enter Senate rules first as a late-filed bill.
Renters advocates appreciate the momentum in the House but know the Senate remains a hurdle.
“The fact is, the House supported this legislation … and it’s stalled in the Senate,” said Matt Losak, executive director of the Montgomery County Renters Alliance. “This is an unfortunate political move that affects hundreds of thousands of tenants across Maryland.”
Brian Anleu of the Metropolitan Washington Apartment and Office Building Association said he was not surprised by Wednesday’s committee vote but expected the bill to have a lower chance of passing the Senate.
“It’s late in the session now, so I’m not entirely sure about the bill’s prospects in the Senate,” he said. “It’s probably going to be bleak until some kind of agreement is reached on some of these issues, but that could change. We’re in the final weeks of the session and things tend to happen very quickly.”
Del. Jheanelle K. Wilkins (D-Montgomery), the sponsor of HB 744, said she was “excited” to see the bill pass the committee. She said she was not frustrated by Monday’s committee vote or the short time remaining in the 2026 legislative session.
“The time frame shouldn’t be an issue. We have plenty of time. I’ve seen bills passed in a day,” Wilkins said. “Once we introduce this bill, the Senate will receive it…so that’s an issue they choose to move forward with.”
Support: You make our work possible
