House expands nuisance statute to include gambling, prostitution and 'party houses'; members emphasize court safeguards

Floor sponsors described HB66 as an expansion of an existing nuisance statute originally used to address drug houses, allowing citizens, public agencies or law enforcement to petition a court to abate a nuisance and potentially evict tenants when a judicial threshold is met. Sponsor testimony emphasized that the statute requires ongoing and continuous conduct (not isolated parties), a preponderance of evidence at hearing, a security bond to protect defendants if petitioners lose, and the possibility of paying opposing attorney fees if unsuccessful.

Sponsor recounted prior neighborhood cleanups accomplished using the drug‑house version of the statute, saying the remedy has helped restore neighborhoods and property values. Members raised concerns about broadening the definition to include 'party houses' and whether that could be used to harass neighbors or to target college‑age gatherings. Sponsors and committee members said they reviewed these questions in committee and that the safeguards (bond, evidentiary burden, court review) make frivolous use unlikely; those supporting the bill said it will be used only in persistent, severe situations.

The House called the previous question, held a vote and the clerk announced the bill passed in the transcript (the reported tally in the transcript appears garbled; see clarifying_details). The sponsor closed by thanking members and citing neighborhood successes under the statute.