Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the No Trespass Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill tightening no‑trespass orders for municipal and school property
Summary
A House committee approved changes to HB1184 that extend emergency no‑trespass orders to 72 hours, require written findings and due‑process steps, allow governing‑body extensions by a three‑fifths vote at a public meeting, and cap orders at 90 days unless extended; the committee voted 18‑0 to recommend the bill with amendment.
The New Hampshire House Municipal and County Government Committee voted to recommend House Bill 1184 with an amendment that rewrites due‑process rules for no‑trespass orders on municipal and school property.
Representative McDonald, who moved the committee amendment (2026‑0756H), said the rewrite clarifies emergency authority and timelines and makes the statute easier to apply. "This amendment clarifies the emergency authority," McDonald said, describing three main changes: an expansion of emergency no‑trespass orders from 24 hours to 72 hours, a requirement that emergency orders be written and include date, time, factual basis and the public property affected, and a firm automatic expiration with a 90‑day cap on orders unless extended.
The amendment also requires that any extension beyond the 72‑hour emergency period occur at a duly noticed public meeting and be approved by a three‑fifths majority of the governing body. McDonald said the sponsor chose three‑fifths as a middle ground between a simple majority and unanimity.
Members raised implementation questions about how a three‑fifths threshold would work on small governing bodies. Representative Murphy asked, "If you have a three member select board, how do you get three‑fifths?" The sponsor and other members discussed whether the language should be adjusted in a floor amendment to avoid confusion in municipalities with small boards.
The committee accepted amendment 2026‑0756H by roll‑call vote, 18‑0, and subsequently voted the bill 'ought to pass with amendment' by the same margin. The bill carries a fiscal note of less than $10,000; because the committee plans to offer a bipartisan floor amendment to clarify the supermajority language, the chair indicated the bill will be placed on the regular calendar rather than consent.
The amendment also provides for judicial review of long‑term exclusions and sets requirements intended to prevent orders from remaining in effect for years without notice or a hearing. The committee discussion emphasized balancing public‑safety authority with due‑process protections for people subject to no‑trespass orders.
The committee closed its executive session on HB1184 after agreeing to collaborate on a floor amendment to clarify the three‑fifths language for small governing bodies.
