WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 5919

AN ACT RELATING TO PROPERTY -- TRESPASS AND VANDALISM -- RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD TENANT ACT

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jackie Baginski and 4 co-sponsors

HB 5919 makes residential squatting a misdemeanor, defines a squatter, and lets landlords remove unauthorized occupants while holdover tenants stay under civil eviction.

03/18/2025 Committee recommended measure be held for further study
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5919

Bill Summary: HB 5919

AN ACT RELATING TO PROPERTY — TRESPASS AND VANDALISM — RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD TENANT ACT

Purpose

The bill clarifies and expands Rhode Island law addressing unauthorized occupancy of residential property by creating a statutory definition of “squatter,” making squatting a misdemeanor, and amending landlord–tenant law to treat squatters differently from tenants. It seeks to give property owners additional remedies against unauthorized occupants while preserving existing protections for lawful tenants who “hold over.”

Key provisions (by statute)

  • Amend § 11-44-26 (Willful trespass)

    • Retains existing criminal penalties for willful trespass (fine up to $1,000 and/or up to 1 year imprisonment).
    • Explicitly references “squatters as defined in § 34-18-11” within the trespass statute language.
    • Confirms tenants who lawfully entered at tenancy start but remain after termination are excluded from criminal trespass and must be removed through civil eviction proceedings.

  • Add § 11-44-29.1 (Squatting on residential property)

    • Creates a standalone misdemeanor offense for squatting: punishable by up to $1,000 fine and/or up to 1 year imprisonment.

  • Amend § 34-18-11 (Definitions — Residential Landlord and Tenant Act)

    • Adds definitions:
    • “Squatter”: a person occupying a dwelling/unit who is not a party to a rental agreement, not a periodic tenant, and not authorized by the owner, landlord, or tenant; explicitly states a squatter is not a tenant (including a holdover periodic tenant).
    • “Squatting”: the act of being a squatter.

  • Add § 34-18-62 (Property owner or landlord's remedy and restitution for squatters) — text truncated in provided version

    • Present text states: a squatter is not a tenant and is not entitled to the protections of the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act; a landlord “shall not be required to commence eviction proceedings” under the chapter.
    • The remainder of subsection (b) and any other remedies, procedures, or restitution provisions are not included in the provided text (truncated).

Who would be affected

  • Property owners and landlords: would have clearer authority to treat unauthorized occupiers as non-tenants, a separate criminal remedy to pursue, and (per the bill’s incomplete text) likely expanded options for removal or restitution.
  • Persons occupying property without authorization (including those characterized as “squatters”): could face misdemeanor criminal charges and penalties.
  • Lawful tenants and holdover tenants: the bill preserves the current rule that a tenant who rightfully entered and remains after tenancy termination is generally not subject to criminal trespass and must be removed via civil proceedings.
  • Law enforcement and courts: could see new misdemeanor cases and possible civil/criminal interplay regarding unauthorized occupancy.

Procedural status & timeline

  • Filed with the Clerk: December 5, 2024 (sponsor listed in actions: Rep. Janet Yang Rohr)
  • First reading / referred to Rules Committee: January 4, 2025
  • Referred to House Judiciary (per version header): February 28, 2025 (version lists sponsors: Reps Baginski, Read, J. Brien, Lima, Corvese)
  • Committee hearing scheduled: March 18, 2025
  • Current status (as of 03/18/2025): Committee recommended measure be held for further study

Notes, uncertainties, and potential impacts

  • The bill both criminalizes squatting (new misdemeanor) and removes squatter-status protections under the landlord–tenant chapter; however, the text for § 34-18-62 is truncated, so specific landlord remedies, procedures for removal, or restitution mechanisms are not available in the provided material.
  • The bill maintains the distinction that former lawful tenants who “hold over” remain subject to civil eviction rather than criminal trespass.
  • Potential impacts include increased criminal enforcement against unauthorized occupants and reduced procedural hurdles for some property owners; it could also raise due-process and homelessness-policy considerations in implementation.
  • Fiscal impacts (court, jail, law enforcement costs or savings) are not specified in the text provided.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.