Citizen in a RepublicNH Bill Briefing
← All bills

HB 422 · 2025 · House · Resources, Recreation and Development Committee

Higher fines for shoreland violations

AI-generated

increasing penalties for violations of the shoreland and water quality protection act.

Raises the maximum civil penalty and administrative fine for violations of the shoreland and water quality protection act from $5,000 to $15,000 per offense.AI-generated

Status

Killed in the House — Inexpedient to Legislate · February 13, 2025
  1. ✓Introduced
  2. ✕House
  3. Senate
  4. Governor
  5. Law

Analysis

This bill increases penalties for violations of the shoreland and water quality protection act.

From the bill's official ANALYSIS section.

In the bill's words

Quoted verbatim from the bill as introduced. Passages chosen from the operative text.Computed by this site

“Persons violating the provisions of this chapter, who fail to restore the site to meet the applicable standards of this chapter within one year of receiving notification of a violation by the department, shall be subject to the following:”
Section 1
“Upon petition of the attorney general or of the municipality in which the violation occurred, the superior court may levy upon any person violating this chapter a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed [$5,000] $15,000 for each continuing violation.”
Section 1
“The superior court shall have jurisdiction to restrain a continuing violation of this chapter, and to require remediation.”
Section 1
“The commissioner, after notice and hearing pursuant to RSA 541-A, may impose an administrative fine of up to [$5,000] $15,000 for each offense upon any person who violates this chapter.”
Section 1

Official record

Bill page — docket & status

gc.nh.gov · the authoritative source

Sponsors

Rep. Rosemarie RungDPrime
  • Rep. John MacDonaldRVice Chair· Municipal and County Government
  • Rep. Karen EbelDDemocratic Leader Pro Tempore
  • Sen. Rebecca Perkins KwokaDMinority Leader

Also: Rep. Richard BrownR, Rep. Nancy MurphyD, Sen. David WattersD

Public testimony

175 signed in online · 92 wrote testimony

97% support3% oppose0% neutral

ForCurrent $5,000 fine is too low to deter violators, treated as a cost of doing business

AgainstIncreased penalties create financial burden and neighbor disputes

AI-generatedLeading arguments, summarized by the testimony tool.

Read the arguments

In their wordsVerbatim, exactly as submitted

“As president of the Contoocook Lake Area Preservation Association (CLAPA), I am writing on behalf of our organization in support of this bill. CLAPA is a 150-member voluntary association dedicated to preserving and protecting the health and beauty of our lake.…”
— Michael Golibersuch, rindge · Contoocook Lake Area Preservation Association (CLAPA)supports
“Our waterways deserve comprehensive protection and this bill does just that. Increasing the amount of fines levied per violation of the shoreland and water quality protection act is long overdue.…”
— Gary Ghioto, Lisbonsupports
“The Shoreland Water Quality Protection Act established a protected shoreland area close to lakes, rivers, and streams. Within this area, vegetation removal, excavation, fill, fertilizer use, and development activities are regulated to safeguard waterbody health.…”
— Laura Colcord, Salisburysupports
“More fees and fines if imposed will cause extreme financial burdens on those accused. We pay enough taxes with little or no return in services.”
— Richard Fulford, Merrimackopposes
“I urge you to oppose increasing violation penalties. There are many lake residents on fixed incomes with properties that have been in the family for decades and some for generations. Costs have increased dramatically in the recent past. Incomes have not.…”
— Kenneth DeLong, Hollisopposes

Verbatim excerpts of submitted testimony, quoted from the testimony tool.

Read the testimony · as of Aug 12, 2026

Votes

yeanay
Starting text: Bill as introduced
  • Jan 29, 2025HouseCommittee report· regular calendar: Inexpedient to Legislate9–7
    Overall
    56% yea
  • Feb 13, 2025HouseRoll callInexpedient to LegislateAdopted196–175How they voted
    Overall
    53% yea
    Party-line vote
    Republicans
    195–797% yea
    Democrats
    1–1681% yea

Hearings and debates

  • Jan 22, 2025Public hearingHouse Resources, Recreation and Development3:02:53–3:04:291m 36slocated in the stream transcriptPublic Hearing
  • Jan 29, 2025Public hearingHouse Resources, Recreation and Development42:48–47:575m 9slocated in the stream transcriptMajority Committee Report: Inexpedient to Legislate — roll call; Executive Session
  • Feb 13, 2025Floor debateHouse floor3:19:12–3:28:349m 22slocated in the stream transcriptInexpedient to Legislate — adopted, roll call 196-175

Timestamps locate where this bill is taken up in the chamber's YouTube stream.

Legislative history

  1. Jan 9, 2025HouseIntroduced (in recess of) 01/09/2025 and referred to Resources, Recreation and Development HJ 3 P. 9
  2. Jan 22, 2025HousePublic Hearing: 01/22/2025 01:00 pm LOB 305
  3. Jan 29, 2025HouseExecutive Session: 01/29/2025 10:15 am LOB 305
  4. Jan 29, 2025HouseMajority : Inexpedient to Legislate 01/29/2025 (Vote 9-7; RC) HC 11 P. 12
  5. Feb 4, 2025HouseMinority : Ought to Pass
  6. Feb 13, 2025HouseInexpedient to Legislate: MA RC 196-175 02/13/2025 HJ 5 P. 30

Coverage

No reporting linked yet.

Documents (PDF)

Bill text & amendments link direct to gc.nh.gov; committee reports stream from the state record.