Committee advances bill restricting emergency use of school facilities for certain non‑citizens; fiscal and legal concerns raised

The committee discussed a bill identified in the record as HB 701 (described at hearing as related to emergency shelters and use of school facilities). Committee discussion and executive session motion focused on whether schools should be available as emergency shelters for people identified in testimony as ‘‘specified aliens’’ (witnesses used that statutory phrase while discussing immigration law).

Supporters of the bill said it would protect school buildings — and students — from ad hoc uses by non‑citizens who have not been vetted and who, they argued, may raise safety or public‑health concerns. Representative Nato and others framed the proposal as a preventive measure to avoid scenarios where large numbers of asylum seekers or other entrants are housed in school gyms or cafeterias without screening.

Opponents urged caution. Several witnesses, including Jerry Frew of the New Hampshire School Administrators Association and department staff, said the bill’s wording could sweep more broadly than supporters intended. DHHS officials and others told the committee a fiscal note estimated annual federal funding risks and related costs of roughly $12–$18 million if the state were to adopt a prohibition that conflicted with federal programs; witnesses also warned the language as drafted could exclude lawful non‑citizen residents (green‑card holders, refugees and those with valid visas) because of unclear statutory definitions.

Civil‑rights and refugee‑resettlement experts were cited by witnesses as cautioning that HUD and the Office of Refugee Resettlement have obligations and mechanisms for emergency placements that do not require citizenship screening at intake; excluding facilities could jeopardize federal grant programs, witnesses said. Administrators also warned the bill could prevent use of school buildings for typical disaster shelters (winter storms, floods) and that municipalities and districts routinely coordinate sheltering with state and local emergency management.

Committee executive‑session minutes show members voted to report the bill as “ought to pass” by a roll‑call (10‑7, one not voting). Several committee members said they would prepare a minority ITL report. Committee members said they will schedule minority/majority report drafting; some members asked for additional legal review of federal program interactions.

Why it matters: The bill sits at the intersection of emergency management, school facility use and federal refugee/resettlement rules. If enacted, it could change how districts respond to unplanned sheltering needs and could affect federal funding streams.

What’s next: Committee has reported the bill as “ought to pass.” Members indicated they will prepare majority and minority reports, and some asked staff to research the bill’s interaction with federal programs and civil‑rights obligations before floor debate.