Sunday, April 17, 2016

Legislative Update, 2016 #15 = CALL TO ACTION. Hearings for major bills scheduled. Show up strong.


Howdee everyone,
Important Updates:
One more of the minor bills is scheduled for public hearing.
Major bills are scheduled as follows:
04/26/2016 at 08:40 AM    SH Room 100
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For, If Section 3 relating to venue is removed.
04/26/2016 at 08:00 AM    SH Room 100
HB1204, Eviction Workout
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For
Are you making a huge legislative mistake?
Are you thinking, I don’t need to get involved because other people are doing something about it?
That’s the kind of thinking that results in poor turn out, legislation going against property owners and people complaining later saying what happened.
NOW IS THE TIME to be contacting Senate Judiciary regarding HB1370 & H1204.  It is critically important that they hear from us now.
We will need an overwhelming response from everyone from here on out through the rest of the legislative process this season to win the uphill battle to defeat section 3 relating to venue.  So prepare now to show up strong for HB1370.
Note:
We absolutely will need everyone to be at the hearing. However, only a few will need to (or because of time constraints be able to) testify.  It will be extremely helpful for everyone else to just sign in as “For” the bill but hand write in “against Section 3 relating to venue”. 
The limited hearing time is all the more reason to be contacting legislators now before the hearing.
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
The very troublesome “venue amendment” is now incorporated into the bill as Section 3 relating to venue.  When contacting legislators refer to this portion of the bill as “section 3 relating to venue”.
To help us with the uphill battle to defeat this section 3 a lobbyist firm has been hired.  If you haven’t already, donating even a small amount to the lobbying expense would be very helpful.  Contact me if you can. Thank you.
All landlords we have spoken to are in agreement with the desire to remove the venue amendment, section 3, and keep the original bill as written.  So at this time please do not get into a discussion with legislators of keeping or killing the bill if section 3 relating to venue survives.  That is a latter discussion.
For now, simply discuss the reasons to remove Section 3 and the reasons to keep the bill as originally written.
Action items this week:
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ACTION ITEM OF THE WEEK.
It’s time to contact the Senators on the Senate Judiciary committee (phone call is best), ask them to remove section 3 relating to venue and urge them to keep the remaining bill as originally written. 
0. Right now block off your calendar with the hearing times above & show up at the hearing.
1. If not done already study HB1370(full detail below)
Bill text is at
See talking points in full detail.  (to jump right to bill detail, use Control-F, Find)
Develop some talking points as to why we need to keep the option for the landlord to have eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides. Note the present law already allows for the tenant to petition the court to move the venue to the court where the tenant resides.  And if the eviction is not for non-payment of rent the court “shall” honor the tenant’s request for change of venue.   So we don't see a need for the amendment.  In a very large amount of the non-payment eviction cases the tenant does not even show up in court any way. Requesting a hearing was just a delaying tactic to get more “free” rent.
Also the landlord needs to go to court to
Get the LT-Writ
Deliver the served LT-Writ
Respond to a change of venue if requested by the tenant
Attend the hearing (where the tenant often does not show up)
Get the Writ of Possession.
4-5 times for the landlord.  Way too much trouble for the landlord who is already inconvenienced by the tenant not paying rent.
Tenant only needs to go twice (file for hearing and possibly request change of venue which could be done by mail or at the venue where the tenant resides), attend hearing (which the tenant often doesn’t do).
0 to 2 times for the tenant.
Also the LT-Writ served on the tenant already contains clear language that the tenant may ask for a change of venue.
2. Email or better call the Senate Judiciary Committee
Ask the Senate Judiciary Committee to remove Section 3 relating to venue and pass the bill as it was originally written.
Give reasons why we need to keep the option for the landlord to have eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides.
Also give reasons why the original bill without Section 3 relating to venue is needed.
Senate Judiciary Committee:
Sharon Carson (Chairman)(603) 271-1403
Sam Cataldo (Vice Chairman) (603) 271-4063
Bette Lasky (603) 271-3091
David Pierce (603) 271-3067
Gary Daniels (603) 271-3042
…….
HB1204, Eviction Workout
1. If not done already study HB1204(full detail below)
Develop some talking points as to why we need in some cases the ability to have eviction work out agreements with tenants that are court enforceable that assure we are paid and the tenant does not loose their home.
2. Email or better call the Senate Judiciary Committee
Ask them to support & pass HB1204. Also give reasons why the bill is needed.  You can mention it overwhelming passed House Judiciary 18-0 because landlord and tenant representatives completely worked out and agreed upon a version that was submitted to House Judiciary 
…….
HB1656, Real Estate Transfer Tax Exception
Email to Senate Ways and Means committee
If not already done ask them to support & pass HB1656. Also give reasons why the bill is needed.
You can mention it overwhelming passed House Ways and Means committee 20-0.
Note that there has been some discussion with the State Department of Revenue and concern that the bill as written does not accomplish clearly its desired result.  There is an amendment and some discussion about fixing the language to accomplish its desired purpose.…….
HB1153 Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
This bill prohibits a political subdivision, town, city, etc from adopting residency restrictions on sex offenders. 
In the past, we have spoken to people that work closely with this issue and have learned that when sex offenders have been excessively restricted on their residency and they are not able to find any place to live they simply go “underground” where they become impossible to track. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety committee voted 15-1 Ought To Pass. That committee's report mentions "When released, sex offenders tend to want to live in the community they came from to get back on their feet with the assistance of family. Local residency restrictions could defeat the purpose of the registration process, producing conditions that hamper efforts to monitor and supervise offenders...This bill is supported by NH law enforcement as well as the New Hampshire coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence."  For all of the above reasons we are taking no position on the bill and leaving it "You Decide".  We are including it to make sure you are aware it is here.
…….
See more info in Summaries & Full Detail for each bill further below. (includes property owner position, contact info, Talking points, and more).
(to jump right to bill detail, use Control-F, Find).
Hearings this week:
None scheduled so far
Hearings next week:
04/26/2016 at 08:00 AM    SH Room 100
HB1204, Eviction Workout
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For
04/26/2016 at 08:20 AM    SH Room 100
HB1298, OHRV, Pollution Triple Damages
Level of Response: Email legislators Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: Against unless amended
04/26/2016 at 08:40 AM    SH Room 100
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
Level of Response: Attend hearings, Email & Call Legislators
Property Owner Position: For, If Section 3 relating to venue is removed.
9:10 a.m. (not one of the bills we’re following)
HB 1248 relative to the waiver of counsel in juvenile delinquency proceedings.
9:30 a.m. (not one of the bills we’re following)
HB 1353 relative to the notice required of a law enforcement officer prior to
making an audio recording of a routine stop.
04/26/2016 at 09:45 AM    SH Room 100
HB1153, Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
Level of Response: You Decide
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Further below is:
Bills Updated Status summary:
Full details on all bills above
(Which includes property owner position, contact info, talking points, and more)
Love & Light,
Nick Norman
Director of Legislative Affairs
==============================================
We only list the committee reports on the most important bills affecting the real estate business.  If you want to get the committee report on one of the other bills contact me & I will show you how to get them on line.  Its not terribly hard to get but not straight ahead either.
==============================================
Bills Updated Status summary:
We only list the committee reports on the most important bills affecting the real estate business.  If you want to get the committee report on one of the other bills contact me & I will show you how to get them on line.  It’s not terribly hard to get but not straight ahead either.
HB1656     
Title: relative to exceptions to the real estate transfer tax.
Property Owner Position: For
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1175     
Title: relative to post-judgment real estate liens.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: 
HB1618     
Title: relative to debt adjustment services.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: 
HB1579     
Title: relative to regulation of the practice of out-of-state brokers by the real estate commission.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED
Senate Status: 
HB1292     
Title: relative to the use of abandoned agricultural property.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED
Senate Status: CONSENT CALENDAR REPORT FILED
HB1204     
Title: relative to payment of rent pending the stay of an eviction proceeding.
Property Owner Position: For
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1298     
Title: relative to damage to private property.
Property Owner Position: Against unless amended
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1370     
Title: relative to termination of tenancy.
Property Owner Position: For, If Section 3 relating to venue is removed.
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
HB1153     
Title: prohibiting a political subdivision from adopting residency restrictions on sex offenders.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
==============================================
Full details on all bills above:
HB1656, Real Estate Transfer Tax Exception
03/22/2016 at 10:00 AM    SH Room 103
Title: Title: relative to exceptions to the real estate transfer tax.
Summary: This bill would allow people to transfer real estate, without being subjected to the real estate transfer tax, between entities with the same ownership, and assets and liabilities.  
Property Owner Position: For
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1656 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This is important to us, as it would allow us to transfer assets into or out of LLC’s or trusts without the transfer taxes. Given some of the rules that the Federal Government has imposed in regard to refinancing, this bill is very helpful. Also, it is important for estate planning purposes and liability protection purposes.   Why should we be taxed just because we have decided to restructure our assets into LLC's or Trusts.
=====================
HB1175, Post-Judgment Real Estate Liens
03/31/2016 at 02:00 PM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to post-judgment real estate liens.
Summary: Clarification and detailing for RSA 524 liens on real property.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1175 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Notes:
This bill amends RSA 503, the statute on small claims, and RSA 524, the statute on court issued judgments. Current law allows a successful party in a small claims action to place a lien on the party’s real estate by recording a certified copy of the judgment in the registry of deeds where the property is located during the duration of the judgment.
The bill has the same requirements as current law, and it clarifies the procedures to be used to discharge the lien.  It also makes it clear that the lien is effective for 20 years after the cause of action accrued.  In addition, it addresses the procedure that has to be followed once the judgment is satisfied. The bill also give the courts authority to discharge liens when a plaintiff fails to do so, and makes it a class B misdemeanor to induce a court to execute a discharge on the basis of information and statements known to the person to be false.
The bill, if it became law, does not make any substantial substantive changes in the law. It does not add any additional procedures that we can use to collect on judgments from former tenants.
Talking Points:
=====================
HB1618, License For Debt Adjustment Services
04/12/2016 at 02:00 PM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to debt adjustment services.
Summary: A bill requiring Debt Adjustment Services be licensed.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1618 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Notes:
This bill would repeal the existing statute on debt adjustment services, and if enacted would replace the old statute with a new statute. Basically, the banking department, under the new bill, will be licensing and regulating debt adjusting services to protect consumers. 
Talking Points:
=====================
HB1579, Regulation Of Out Of State Real Estate Brokers
04/12/2016 at 02:15 PM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to regulation of the practice of out-of-state brokers by the real estate commission.
Summary: A bill regarding the regulation of out of state real estate brokers
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1579 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Notes:
This bill would regulate or amend the regulation of out of state real estate brokers and salespersons in the sale of commercial real estate (all real estate except residences of four units or less).  The out of state person would have to have a specified working relationship with an in state broker.
Talking Points:
=====================
HB1292, Abandonment of Agricultural Property
04/13/2016 at 09:00 AM    LOB Room 101
Title: Title: relative to the use of abandoned agricultural property.
Summary: The bill simple amends the existing statute by deleting the word “disuse” to “abandonment “ to allow for special exceptions to the reestablishment of use of land for agricultural purposes.  
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1292 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
We're basically just letting you know this bill is here incase you think it may impact you.  Not sure we have the knowledge to take a position on the bill.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
HB1204, Eviction Workout
04/26/2016 at 08:00 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to payment of rent pending the stay of an eviction proceeding.
Summary: Provide statutory method for allowing eviction work out agreements which became disallowed in District Courts because of the NH Supreme Court Mountain View v. Robson decision in May of 2015.
Property Owner Position: For
Email to Committee: 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
First thing to say is disregard the bill as originally written.  We have been negotiating with NHLA on the language for this bill & have an agreed upon amendment which rewrites the bill. So do not spend much time reviewing the original bill.  We are calling the amendment the “1/24/16 HB1204 RPOA NHLA Amendment”.   Please urge legislators to pass the bill as amended by the “1/24/16 HB1204 RPOA NHLA Amendment.”. 
Based upon RSA 540:13c, Landlords and Tenants have entered into agreements in eviction actions based upon non-payment of rent allowing tenants to remain in possession of the leased premises so long as they make payments that are written in the agreement. In many instances, the Landlord and Tenant agree to a schedule where the tenant pays rental arrearages, but is also required to pay future rent as it becomes due.
          These agreements are advantageous to both the Landlord and the Tenant. The Tenant has the opportunity to remain in their home and not be evicted. The Tenant can pay the rental arrears over a period of time that they have negotiated with the Landlord, while the Tenant does not fall further behind in rent. This is particularly helpful to a tenant who fell behind in rent due to a sickness, injury or slowdown in work, who has subsequently overcome these problems.
          The Landlord gains the opportunity to be paid the arrears, and future rent, without the need to file a new eviction action should the tenant not abide by the agreement.
          However, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire, in the case of Mountain View Park LLC v. Robson, decided August 11, 2015, ruled that agreements entered into between Landlords and Tenants in non-payment of rent cases, cannot contain provisions regarding the future payment of rent. Any agreement containing clauses requiring the Tenant to pay future rent submitted by the parties to an eviction action based upon non-payment of rent will have to be rejected by the Circuit Court. This decision takes away from both Landlords and Tenants an effective tool to resolve eviction cases to their mutual benefit. 
HB1204 as we have amended it revises the statute to specifically allow these type of agreements and spells out the procedures for the court to follow if the tenant fails to make payments as required by the agreement.
Please note that we did some research and found out that there presently is no statutory guidance or guidance in rules from Judge Kelly's office for the affidavit of non-compliance process.  This means courts could get to the process where the tenant does not make payment and have sympathy for tenant and not order the writ of possession or severely drag this out.  For instance, presently Derry court allows 10 days from landlord’s affidavit of non-compliance (tenant didn’t make payment) for tenant to respond and then it would schedule hearing.  Based on our research many courts would be like Derry which is why we need the extra detail of the later part of this bill.R[-1]C
=====================
HB1298, OHRV, Pollution Triple Damages
04/26/2016 at 08:20 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to damage to private property.
Summary: The bill creates a cause of action for a landowner whose land is damaged by pollution. This bill also creates a cause of action for a landowner whose land is damaged by OHRV, Off-Highway Recreational Vehicle, use.  There is also provision for triple damages and attorney's fees.
Property Owner Position: Against unless amended
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB1298 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
This bill could be a two edge sword for anyone who owns land and has any material on the property that can be deemed hazardous if it leaked.  Heating oil might be included in this. It also gives a landowner the right to sue another for polluting that landowner’s property.  That right probably exists at this time but the right does not include the right to seek triple damages based upon the recklessness of conduct and attorney’s fees which the bill would allow. It also allows an owner to seek injunctive relief to stop continuing pollution and to force the cleanup of the damage.
The bill also has a section allowing for triple damages to land from off road vehicles.
The bill can impose greater liability upon us.  Triple damages are always dangerous and ripe for abuse.  What if a tenant dumps oil on your property and it seeps onto a neighbor.  Will the neighbor be able to sue you for triple damages?
However, the bill also gives us more protection from polluters.
We would support the bill if amended from triple damages to actual damages.
We also would like to see something defined that a landlord would not be held liable for a tenant's action if the landlord was unaware of the tenant's action.
=====================
HB1370, 7 Days Eviction Notice
04/26/2016 at 08:40 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to termination of tenancy.
Summary: This bill reduces the eviction notice from 30 days to 7 days in the following instances:
Failure of tenant to put utilities in their name when required to do so.
Someone staying in the unit who is not on the lease for more than 14 days consecutive or 30 days in a calendar year. There was also a very troublesome amendment added during the House session that requires all evictions to be filed in the venue where the property resides.
Property Owner Position: For, If Section 3 relating to venue is removed.
Email to Committee: 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
There is a terrible “venue” amendment that was proposed at the Judiciary Committee initial public hearing now called "Section 3 relating to venue".
First we will address this "Section 3 relating to venue" which takes away a landlord’s option to hold eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides.
It is our position that this amendment is far more troublesome to almost all landlords than the benefit of the reduced eviction notice times in the original bill.
Therefore, we are strongly opposed to this Section 3 and recommending that Section 3 relating to venue be taken off the bill.
Here are some thoughts relating to the amendment taking away a landlord’s option to hold eviction hearings in the court where the property owner resides.
a. Landlords have way way more eviction hearings than a single tenant so the jurisdiction really should be in the court where the property owner resides.  Also, for one eviction the landlord needs to go to court to:
Get the LT-Writ
Deliver the served LT-Writ
Respond to a change of venue if requested by the tenant
Attend the hearing (where the tenant often does not show up)
Get the Writ of Possession.
4-5 times for the landlord.  Way too much trouble for the landlord who is already inconvenienced by the tenant not paying rent.
Tenant only needs to go twice (file for hearing and possibly request change of venue which could be done by mail or at the venue where the tenant resides), attend hearing (which the tenant often doesn’t do).
0 to 2 times for the tenant.
b. Tenants can request jurisdiction be moved to their location which the court can grant if it sees the need.
c. Tenants very often don't even show up anyway. Requesting a hearing was simply a delaying tactic to achieve more “free rent”.
d. requesting a change of venue and not showing up to court is yet another delaying tactic to achieve more “free rent”.
e. If the tenant paid the rent it would not be an issue.  The landlord is already inconvenienced by the tenant not paying the rent, providing free housing during the eviction process.  Why make the eviction more difficult for the small businessman (landlord)?
Additionally,
This Section 3 relating to venue is not needed because present law already states that in cases other than non-payment the court “shall” transfer the venue.   In cases of non-payment the court “may” transfer venue.  The RSA is quoted immediately below.
“RSA 502-A:16-a. Change of Venue in Possessory Actions Regarding Residential Property
Venue in possessory actions concerning residential property brought pursuant to RSA 540 which are initiated in a judicial district other than that in which the defendant resides may be transferred as follows:
I. In cases based on grounds other than nonpayment of rent, venue shall be transferred to the judicial district in which the defendant resides at the request of the defendant.
II. In cases based on nonpayment of rent, venue may be transferred to the judicial district in which defendant resides when the court, in its discretion, determines that justice so requires.”
A plain language explanation of the above provision is already included on page two of the LT-Writ underneath the caption in bold titled “Information for tenant”.
Now on to the actual bill.
Last session, 2015, we attempted putting this bill through with the addition of unauthorized pets.
There was a large push back about the 7 day notice for unauthorized pets.  This session we are submitting the bill without the inclusion of unauthorized pets. 
This is one of the major bills this session and we still expect good sized push back and definitely need every one to show up at hearings and communicate to the committees and legislators to support this very important bill.
New Hampshire law allows a landlord in most residential tenancies to evict tenants by serving the tenants either a 7 days Eviction Notice or a 30 days eviction notice. Presently the 7 days eviction notice can only be used in certain limited circumstances.  Those circumstances are: (a) non-payment of rent  (b) substantial damages caused by the tenant, members of his family or guests (c) behavior by the tenant, members of  his family or guest that adversely affects the health, safety of the landlord or other tenants or failure to accept temporary alternative housing during lead paint abatement.  All other evictions require a 30 days Eviction Notice.
This bill has major advantages for landlords in dealing with the tenants who are purposely breaking the terms of a lease in the two circumstances outlined above, or do not have the financial means to abide by the terms of the lease.
HB1370, if enacted, would add two additional circumstances where a landlord could use a 7 days Eviction Notice.  These two are:
(1) Failure to establish utilities in the tenant’s name or terminating utility service when the tenant is required to pay such under the terms of the lease.  Please note, that each of the above categories has to be a breach of the lease. For those landlords who do not use leases, or do not prohibit these categories in their leases, they would not be able to use the provisions of this bill, if it became law.
(2) a person staying in the leased premises who is not a party to the lease, and does not have the consent of the landlord, for more than 14 consecutive days or more than 30 days in a calendar year 
If a tenant does not put utilities into his or her name, or terminates utilities or has utilities shut off on them, one of two things could happen.  The first is creating a risk of the building freezing during the winter. The longer the utilities are off, the greater the risk of damage to the building. The second is that the utilities are often transferred into the landlord’s name, and the landlord has to pay for services that the tenant agreed to pay for when the tenant signed the lease. Since a landlord may not terminate utilities on a tenant the landlord then remains stuck paying for a tenant’s utilities which the tenant should be paying per the lease agreement. Reducing the time that tenant had to use someone else’s services, would reduce the loss to the landlord. This is no different than a non-payment of rent, especially since rents are reduced when utilities, principally heat, is not included.
The bill would also allow the tenant to cure these lease violations and stop the eviction by having the utilities billed to the tenant and paying the landlord any costs the landlord incurred in the seven days.  The tenant can only cure this violation three times in the last 12 months, however.
Extra people who move into our apartments, especially if the landlord pays for heat and hot water, use these utilities solely at the expense of the landlord.  The additional people not only increase utility usage but also wear and tear of the apartment, again at the landlord’s expense. These people also are not parties to lease, many times do not know or care about the terms of the lease or the rules and regulations of the landlord, and have nothing to lose if they violate the terms of the lease. Since they are invited into the apartment by the tenant, the police are reluctant to issue a no trespass order. Basically, these extra people are living for free at the landlord’s expense. Some may even consider these people stealing our services.  And what about those cases where an invitee of a tenant takes over the apartment saying they are the tenant but have never signed or agreed to any terms of the lease.  People who are “crashing” at someone's apartment, can be a danger to the landlord and other tenants unless properly screened and approved.
The tenant can also cure the lease violation of an extra person living in the apartment by having the extra person permanently move from the apartment within the seven days. The tenant can only cure this lease violation once.
Landlords often get complaints from other tenants at the property about these issues.  This bill would help landlords to more quickly address the concerns of other tenants in the building & enforce the terms of the lease more efficiently.
This is our bill and we need to fully support its passage.  The “venue” amendment now "Section 3 relating to venue" was a surprise, is against us and we need to have it removed before passing the original bill as written.
=====================
HB1153, Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
04/26/2016 at 09:45 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: prohibiting a political subdivision from adopting residency restrictions on sex offenders.
Summary: This bill prohibits a political subdivision, town, city, etc from adopting residency restrictions on sex offenders. 
Property Owner Position: You Decide
Email to Committee: 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
Talking Points:
In the past, we have spoken to people that work closely with this issue and have learned that when sex offenders have been excessively restricted on their residency and they are not able to find any place to live they simply go “underground” where they become impossible to track. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety committee voted 15-1 Ought To Pass. That committee's report mentions "When released, sex offenders tend to want to live in the community they came from to get back on their feet with the assistance of family. Local residency restrictions could defeat the purpose of the registration process, producing conditions that hamper efforts to monitor and supervise offenders...This bill is supported by NH law enforcement as well as the New Hampshire coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence."  For all of the above reasons we are taking no position on the bill and leaving it "You Decide".  We are including it to make sure you are aware it is here.
=====================
==============================================

===========================================================

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)