HB 625-FN – AS INTRODUCED
2009 SESSION
09/04
HOUSE BILL 625-FN
AN ACT relative to court security screening procedures.
SPONSORS: Rep. Nixon, Hills 17
This bill requires the supreme court to adopt and maintain adequate court security screening procedures to protect court personnel and the public.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
09-0393
09/04
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine
AN ACT relative to court security screening procedures.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 New Chapter; Court Security Screening Procedures. Amend RSA by inserting after chapter 490-E the following new chapter:
CHAPTER 490-F
COURT SECURITY SCREENING PROCEDURES
490-F:1 Court Security Screening Procedures. The supreme court shall adopt rules providing for adequate security screening procedures to protect the lives and well-being of all court personnel and members of the public entering courthouses. These procedures shall be implemented in each courthouse in the state on or before January 1, 2011. Each person entering a courthouse shall be screened for security purposes, except for judges, court officers and employees, and attorneys who meet the qualifications established by the committee on character and fitness and have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, the constitution of the state of New Hampshire, and the laws adopted by the United States and this state.
2 Effective Date. This act shall take effect 60 days after its passage.
LBAO
09-0393
01/22/09
HB 625-FN - FISCAL NOTE
AN ACT relative to court security screening procedures.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Judicial Branch states this bill may increase state expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2010 and each year thereafter. The New Hampshire Association of Counties states this bill will have an indeterminable fiscal impact on county revenues and expenditures in FY 2010 and each year thereafter. The Department of Administrative Services states this bill will have an indeterminable fiscal impact on state expenditures in FY 2010 and each year thereafter. There will be no fiscal impact on local expenditures or state and local revenues.
METHODOLOGY:
The Judicial Branch states this bill requires the Supreme Court to adopt and maintain adequate court security screening procedures to protect court personnel and the public. The Branch states screening of each person entering a courthouse already occurs in the state’s 42 court locations, housing 79 courts. The Branch states any potential fiscal impact will result from the bill’s provision that attorneys meeting the qualifications established by the committee will be exempted from the screening process. A pilot program has been in place in the Hillsborough County Superior Court for the southern judicial district in Nashua. In this system, the bailiff scans each attorney’s card and permits the attorney to bypass the magnetometer if the attorney’s image matches that on the card. To adopt this system in each court location, the Branch estimates state expenditures will increase for the one-time equipment purchase by $246,000 in FY 2010 ($6,000 per system x remaining 41 court locations). Alternatively, if the screening procedure only requires attorneys have bar association-issued photo identification, the proposed bill will have limited fiscal impact on the Judicial Branch.
The New Hampshire Association of Counties states the Sheriffs’ Departments currently provide security screening procedures in the courthouses. The state pays the county a per-diem rate for the personnel, though in some cases the counties pay the personnel a higher amount in order to be able to attract workers. Because the rules implementing the proposed bill have not yet been written, the fiscal impact cannot be determined at this time.
LBAO
09-0393
01/22/09
The Department of Administrative Services states because the bill does not specify necessary screening procedures and because rules implementing the proposed bill have not yet been written, the fiscal impact cannot be determined at this time.
This bill does not include an appropriation.