EHB 2294
SignedHouse
Use restrictions/food, med.
Prohibiting negative use restrictions on real property that have the effect of limiting consumer access to food and medicine.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill bans private agreements that block grocery stores or pharmacies from operating on properties where such uses are allowed under local zoning rules. It aims to improve access to food and medicine by removing artificial barriers created by restrictive covenants or lease terms. It includes limited exceptions for relocations and within retail centers, and gives state and local officials authority to enforce the law.
- Bans private agreements (like deed restrictions or lease terms) that prohibit or limit grocery stores or pharmacies on properties where such uses are allowed under local zoning laws.
- Makes such restrictions void and unenforceable if they prevent a grocery store or pharmacy from operating where otherwise permitted.
- Allows exceptions for pre-existing restrictions (in place before March 9, 2026), and for relocation clauses—e.g., if a store closes and reopens within one year (or extended by local government) within one-half mile (or up to one mile with approval).
- Permits restrictions limiting the number of grocery stores or pharmacies within a single retail center (e.g., a shopping mall), but only while the original store is still operating; such restrictions expire if the store stays closed for over a year.
- Authorizes the attorney general and local governments to enforce the law through civil lawsuits, injunctions, or civil penalties under the state’s consumer protection law.
Who is affected
- Grocery stores and pharmacies — Grocery stores and pharmacies (including drug stores) that want to open or relocate to a new location may no longer be blocked by private agreements that prohibit or limit their use on certain properties, making it easier to access available retail space.
- Property owners and developers — Property owners and developers who previously relied on restrictive covenants to prevent grocery stores or pharmacies from operating on their land may no longer enforce those restrictions, potentially changing how they plan or lease commercial space.
- General public / consumers — Residents in neighborhoods where grocery stores or pharmacies were previously blocked by private agreements may gain improved access to food and medicine as new locations become feasible.
- Local governments — Local governments (cities, towns, and counties) gain authority to enforce the law and may issue civil penalties under local ordinances, and may also request extensions of certain time/distance limits for store relocations.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
By voiding private agreements that block pharmacies or drug stores on zoningly permitted land, the bill directly improves physical access to essential medications—especially in underserved neighborhoods where such restrictions have contributed to pharmacy deserts, reducing travel time and improving adherence to treatment regimens.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)Eliminating restrictive covenants that bar grocery stores on eligible land expands retail options in food deserts—particularly benefiting low-income and minority communities where supermarket access is limited and car ownership is lower, directly improving food security and nutrition outcomes.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)By preventing indefinite exclusivity in retail centers, the bill encourages competition and prevents monopolistic control over essential retail services within shopping districts—supporting market dynamics that can improve service quality and pricing for consumers.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(3)(c)(ii)Local governments gain authority to extend relocation deadlines for good cause (e.g., financing delays, community need), enabling them to balance business continuity with public access goals—strengthening local planning flexibility without requiring new state funding.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 3The bill creates a new enforcement mechanism—leveraging the state’s consumer protection law—giving both the attorney general and local governments tools to challenge unlawful restrictions, reducing legal uncertainty and enabling swift relief for businesses seeking to open or relocate.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 4(1), Sec. 4(2), Sec. 5
Potential Concerns (5)
Existing private agreements in place before March 9, 2026 are grandfathered in and remain enforceable, meaning many current property owners and landlords retain the ability to block or limit grocery stores and pharmacies on their properties—delaying or preventing improved access for residents in areas where such restrictions are still active.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(3)(a)Restrictions limiting number of stores within a retail center expire only if a store remains closed for over a year—creating a disincentive for temporary closures (e.g., for renovations, financial distress, or health emergencies), potentially locking in underperforming or obsolete stores and reducing flexibility for operators and landlords.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(3)(c)(ii)While local governments gain enforcement authority, they must allocate staff and legal resources to pursue civil enforcement actions—potentially diverting limited local resources from other priorities, especially in smaller jurisdictions without dedicated consumer protection units.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(1), Sec. 4(2)(c)The bill may reduce property owners’ negotiating power in commercial leases, especially for small landlords or developers who previously used exclusive-use clauses to attract anchor tenants or ensure tenant mix—potentially lowering lease premiums or reducing long-term lease stability for commercial properties.
HousingLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(2)(c)The three-year term limit on relocation restrictions may pressure grocery/pharmacy operators to rush relocations or forgo temporary closures—even when financially prudent—because they risk losing protection against new competitors if they exceed the limit, potentially harming operational stability and long-term planning.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(3)(b)(iv)
Who Is Most Affected
Grocery stores and pharmacies gain the ability to open or relocate without being blocked by private agreements—improving site selection flexibility and reducing barriers to market entry, especially for chains and larger operators with capital to act quickly.
Property owners and developers lose the ability to use exclusive-use clauses to control tenant mix or attract anchor tenants—potentially reducing lease negotiation leverage and long-term rental stability, though may increase occupancy by broadening potential tenants.
Residents in food and medicine deserts—especially low-income, elderly, and transit-limited populations—gain improved access to essential services, reducing travel burden and improving health outcomes; however, benefits depend on private operators choosing to open in newly accessible locations.
Local governments gain enforcement authority and can extend relocation timelines for good cause, strengthening their ability to address community needs—but must allocate staff time to enforcement, which may strain smaller jurisdictions.
Landlords of small shopping centers or strip malls may benefit from broader tenant pools and higher occupancy, but may lose ability to curate tenant mix—potentially increasing vacancy risk if anchor tenants leave and cannot be replaced under new rules.