When your apartment lease is up, should you be guaranteed a renewal?

That question led to a heated debate in Hartford on Tuesday.

Tenants argued that “no cause evictions” are unfair, while property owners said it’s unfair to force them to offer a new lease.

José Benitez, of New Britain, is worried about losing his apartment.

“I live there for seven years,” he told state lawmakers. “I’m a single dad of two.”

Benitez said that his landlord gave tenants an impossible choice – swallow a 70% rent hike or move out. He claimed residents who complained to the city’s Fair Rent Commission were retaliated against.

“Guess what? We’re not going to renew your lease and here’s a form for vacate. You’ve got to leave," he said. “A lot of the tenants had to leave because of the flipping, just because of the flipping – the rent increases that are happening.”

Benitez is asking lawmakers to ban so-called “no cause evictions.” Unless you are at least 62 years old or have a disability, when your lease is up your landlord can ask you to leave with 90 days' notice.

But a new bill would require property owners to renew a lease unless the tenant doesn’t pay the rent, violates the lease terms or keeps the unit unclean and unsafe. The rules would apply to any complex with five or more units.

Landlords could also take an apartment off the market, including to live in it.

But property owners said the bill infringes on their private property rights.

“Contracts – leases – have a beginning and end,” said property owner Adam Bonoff. “Why should this be the only one that goes on forever?”

Bonoff added that non-renewal is often the only way to get rid of a disruptive resident.

“It will now be harder to get rid of a bad tenant than it is to divorce a spouse should this pass,” he said. “’Cause’ is a very difficult thing to prove and can take years and courts to reach a conclusion. A drug dealer may be a very good payer, but very bad for a building – as is a child molester, thief or other type of intimidator.”

Others said that the bill could also backfire for tenants.

“If you start imposing these requirements, I’m not going to offer housing in the state anymore,” said state Sen. Rob Sampson (R-Wolcott), who is also a property manager. “And what that will do is end up increasing rents more.”

Other proposals would make it harder for investors to buy properties and significantly increase the rent. Increases above 10% would automatically be flagged as “excessive” by the local Fair Rent Commission, which could then issue a waiver if a landlord could justify the increase.

Another bill would limit security deposits to one month’s rent, although tenants with bad credit could offer more as an incentive.

“In Norwalk Connecticut, a studio is $3,500,” said state Rep. Kadeem Roberts (D-Norwalk). “So we’ve got to be honest and understand, like, no one has $10,000 to put up.”

A third proposal would limit when landlords could consider an applicant’s criminal history.

Last year, News 12 Connecticut reported on a New Haven man who was rejected because of a misdemeanor from 35 years ago. Earlier this month, the property manager reached a settlement with him and change its criminal history policy.

Benitez said the current rental market shuts tenants like him out.

“If this bill passes, it’s going to help a lot of people,” he said. “I know because I’m living it now.”

The General Assembly’s Housing Committee is currently considering all three bills. You can submit written testimony HERE.

The proposals have failed several times before and face an uphill battle this session.