Panel advances bill removing pre‑showing buyer agency requirement amid dispute concerns

The Senate Committee on Government Organization voted to report House Bill 50‑91 to the full Senate with a recommendation that it pass as amended and first be referred to the Judiciary Committee. Committee counsel described a strike‑and‑insert amendment that would make clear no consumer must enter a buyer's agency agreement before executing a written offer, require a written disclosure before preparing an offer, and recast duties of real estate licensees.

Delegate Patrick Lucas (D‑District 24), the bill’s lead sponsor present in the hearing, told the committee the measure responds to a settlement involving the National Association of Realtors that led to mandatory exclusive buyer's agency agreements. "This bill is trying to fix that problem," Lucas said, arguing the change restores prior practice and increases consumer choice. Lucas said agents remain obligated to disclose whom they represent and who is paying the buyer's agent and that most sellers still pay commissions in practice.

The junior senator from the 16th pressed a line of questioning centered on potential disputes over compensation if no pre‑showing agreement is required. He said an agent might show a buyer multiple properties, only to have the buyer later seek a lower commission with the listing agent at contract stage, and warned the bill could "pull the rug out from under" buyer's agents. Lucas replied that the bill permits the parties to document compensation terms in the written offer and provides flexibility for resolving disputes.

Committee members adopted the strike‑and‑insert amendment as explained by counsel and then adopted a motion to report the bill to the full Senate as amended. The transcript records vocal 'ayes' and the chair's declaration that the motion was adopted; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the hearing transcript.