Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Unauthorized Camping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to speed removal of unauthorized camping from private property
Summary
Sponsor said the measure would let police remove unauthorized campers from private land in larger municipalities without the current no‑trespass paperwork delay; proponents cited cleanup costs and safety, critics raised broader social-service questions.
The Senate committee heard testimony on a bill, SB521, designed to make it easier for property owners and police to remove unauthorized campers from private land in designated municipalities.
The sponsor said the existing law (which the committee discussed as RSA 236:58 for public land) covers camping on public property but not private property and that the bill would expand tools for owners to address unauthorized camping. He said the change would apply to a limited set of municipalities (11 cities and 18 towns as drafted) and that the aim is to reduce cleanup costs and hazards. "We had three people move to the end of my parking lot... the police served it 10 days later. We went in to clean up the debris and it was over $50,000," the sponsor said, describing a local cleanup example.
Steve Dupree, who also testified on other bills, reiterated that the proposal is meant to close an enforcement gap that currently requires landowners to obtain do-not-trespass orders and wait for service before removal. Dupree told the committee that municipal police told him having this tool would reduce the delay and related costs, and could lead people to avail themselves of services rather than remain encamped on private land.
Committee members asked whether the problem was enforcement of existing posting and trespass laws. Dupree said posted signs do not always solve the problem — particularly on large properties or in urban edges — and argued the bill would reduce burdens on landowners and police. Senator Carson and other members raised liability and service‑referral concerns; Dupree acknowledged the bill does not solve the broader social-service needs that underlie unauthorized camping but said it would help property owners and municipal responses.
The hearing closed with committee discussion and no immediate floor vote; the committee later moved some business into executive session on the same day and recorded an 'ought to pass' motion during that session (committee minutes record a voice vote in favor).
