Maryland Senate Bill SB462

Maryland 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/2/26

Caption

Landlord and Tenant - Residential Leases and Holdover Tenancies - Local Good Cause Termination (Good Cause Eviction)

Impact

If enacted, SB462 would amend existing laws to introduce a requirement for landlords to demonstrate good cause when seeking to not renew a lease or terminate a holdover tenancy. The bill lists specific grounds that would qualify as good cause, including substantial breaches of lease agreements, tenant illegal activities, and refusal of tenants to allow landlord access for necessary repairs. It mandates that leases include clear notifications when a local good cause statute is applicable, enhancing awareness for tenants and creating a more equitable renting environment. This law could lead to significant changes in how landlords manage residential properties and interact with tenants.

Summary

Senate Bill 462, titled 'Landlord and Tenant – Residential Leases and Holdover Tenancies – Local Good Cause Termination (Good Cause Eviction)', aims to empower counties in Maryland to enact local laws prohibiting landlords from terminating leases or holdover tenancies without 'good cause'. This bill addresses the concerns surrounding tenant rights and provides a framework for local jurisdictions to regulate landlord actions more strictly, particularly in situations where a tenant is facing non-renewal or eviction without justification. A significant aspect of this bill emphasizes clarity in communication between landlords and tenants regarding their rights and obligations under local ordinances.

Contention

The bill may spark discussions around balancing landlord rights with tenant protections. Some landowners and property management companies may view the requirements as burdensome, potentially complicating the lease-termination process and discouraging investment in rental properties within counties that adopt such laws. Critics of the bill might argue that while it aims to protect tenant rights, it could lead to adverse economic effects by making it more difficult for landlords to manage their properties effectively. The inherent complexities and local variabilities implied by such a law could challenge the market, highlighting a tension between regulation and property management freedoms.