Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would require nonmonetary alternatives to fines for sleeping outdoors; sponsors call criminalization of poverty counterproductive
Summary
HB 10‑91 would require municipalities that ban sleeping or camping on public property to offer a nonmonetary penalty alternative (community service, service‑referral, housing verification). Sponsors and advocates said fines punish people with no means and hinder housing stability; municipal leaders urged clearer drafting or a local‑option approach.
Representative Jody Newell introduced House Bill 10‑91, proposing that municipal ordinances forbidding sleeping or camping on public property include a nonmonetary alternative to fines for persons subject to the ordinance. Sponsors argued criminal fines against unhoused people are counterproductive and exacerbate barriers to housing, while offering municipalities options such as verified service enrollment, community service, or casework referrals.
Testimony from public‑health nurses, social‑service providers and unhoused community members described cases where fines quickly accumulate for persons with no ability to pay. Representative Paige Beauchmann of Nashua said the city lacks shelter capacity and described a constituent who had accrued several hundred dollars in fines while trying to support neighbors in an encampment.
The New Hampshire Municipal Association and municipal witnesses expressed concerns about the bill’s clarity and the administrative burden on towns, asking whether the state or local governments would be required to provide the nonmonetary option and which municipal official would select it. Municipal representatives suggested a local‑option approach or careful statutory drafting to define the scope (public vs. private property), the body that imposes the alternative remedy, and the resources required to implement it.
Lawmakers and witnesses discussed possible narrower language — for example, barring enforcement where shelter beds do not exist — as a pragmatic alternative. The committee took no vote and signaled the need for additional drafting and fiscal/operational analysis.
