Codes and Ordinances Committee
Regular MeetingRochester, NH · March 23, 2026
Minutes
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
Members Present
Councilor Walker, Chair
Councilor Gianotti
Councilor Horne
Councilor Rice
Councilor Richardson
Mayor Grassie
Members Excused or Absent
Councilor Fontneau, Vice Chair
Others Present
Lauren McGinley, Executive Director of the NH Harm Reduction Coalition
Jason Lucey, Assistant Professor at MGH Institute of Health Professions
Doctor Kerry Nolte, Associate Professor of Nursing at UNH
Renee McIsaac, resident
Ashley Desrochers, resident
Zebadiah McGill, resident
SPECIAL CODES AND ORDINANCES COMMITTEE
of the Rochester City Council
Monday, March 23, 2026
Council Chambers
6:00 PM
Minutes
1. Call to Order
Councilor Walker called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Austin Leavitt, Deputy City Clerk, took the roll call attendance. Councilor
Fontneau was excused and Councilor Horne was present as his alternate. All
other regular members and Mayor Grassie were present.
3. Discussions
5.1. Discussion: New Article III of City Ordinances Chapter 94,
Syringe Service Program and Needle Disposal
1
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
Renee McIsaac, resident, echoed the concerns about restricting Syringe
Service Providers (SSPs) raised by subject matter experts at the March 5
meeting of the Codes and Ordinances Committee. Ms. McIsaac spoke about
the benefits of SSPs.
Lauren McGinley, Executive Director of the NH Harm Reduction Coalition,
expressed willingness to collaborate with the Council and share information
from her experience working with SSPs across the state. Director McGinley
spoke about her experience working directly with the city of Manchester on
drafting their syringe services ordinance.
Ashley Desrochers, resident and volunteer with the NH Harm Reduction
Coalition, noted that the draft ordinance before the Council appeared to be
based on a draft proposed in Manchester prior to consulting with experts in
the field and health professionals. Ms. Desrochers noted that the city of
Manchester had ultimately passed a version of this ordinance which did not
reflect all the advice of those consulted, and that the rate of overdoses within
the city had increased in the time since. Ms. Desrochers additionally spoke
about the fiscal benefits of SSPs, and noted the availability of opioid
abatement funds to offset the associated costs.
Councilor Rice inquired for more details about the origins of the draft
ordinance. Director McGinley confirmed that the draft was based on a version
of the ordinance she was asked to consult on by the city of Manchester and
highlighted some of the changes that were incorporated based on her and
others’ feedback, most notably including an allowance for mobile or pop-up
SSPs.
Councilor Richardson asked if the final version of Manchester’s ordinance
still included a 1-for-1 needle exchange limit. Ms. Desrochers confirmed that
it did, but added that this inclusion contradicted the advice of subject matter
experts.
Zebadiah McGill, resident, questioned the insistence on a 1-for-1 needle
exchange limit instead of a needs-based needle exchange, which the evidence
presented seemed to support. Mr. McGill suggested that the draft ordinance
should be reviewed in consultation with the affected parties.
2
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
Jason Lucey, Assistant Professor at the Massachusetts General Hospital
Institute of Health Professions, noted that he had submitted a letter to the
Council outlining his concerns with the draft ordinance. Mr. Lucey praised the
history of successful harm reduction efforts in Rochester so far. Additionally,
he expressed willingness to provide his healthcare experience as a resource
for the Council.
Doctor Kerry Nolte, Associate Professor of Nursing at the University of
New Hampshire, offered her experience as a resource for the Council. Dr. Nolte
highlighted early data showing the success of a pilot program she was involved
in with the city of Dover to reduce syringe litter and reiterated her offer to
help organize a similar program in Rochester at no cost to the City.
Additionally, she asked for clarity on the purpose of the ordinance and what
problems the Council was seeking to address. She noted that the SOS
Recovery Community Center’s current “1-for-1 plus ten” needle exchange rate
was already considered to be lower than best practices.
Councilor Walker raised concerns about data provided by SOS, which
showed that the number of syringes distributed quarterly was roughly 20,000
higher than the number recovered. Dr. Nolte responded that it is an important
function of SSPs to provide clean syringes to patrons as needed, to promote
better health outcomes for the individual and the community by reducing
reliance on dirty, dull, and shared needles.
Councilor Richardson inquired about the correlation between a 1-for-1
needle exchange restriction and increased overdose rates. Dr. Nolte responded
that opioid addicts and users in withdrawal may make poorer decisions when
a desperate situation is compounded by a lack of access to a clean or reliable
supply of syringes. She noted that these restrictions are shown to reduce
engagement with SSPs, reducing their ability to provide overdose prevention
education and distribute overdose prevention supplies or to connect users with
recovery and rehabilitation services.
Councilor Gianotti inquired whether the individuals utilizing SSPs are
eventually moving on to treatment services. Dr. Nolte responded that, in her
experience as a health care provider, many of the individuals seeking
treatment services are referred to her by SSPs. She additionally noted that
many SSPs are staffed by individuals who have successfully entered recovery.
3
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
Councilor Horne inquired about what kinds of measures could be taken
to control the syringe supply in circulation. Dr. Nolte responded that the first
concern for SSPs is making clean syringes accessible to people in need. She
added that one of the most effective methods proven to address the syringe
supply is by providing safe and accessible means to dispose of syringes.
Councilor Horne inquired why SSPs cannot exercise tighter control over the
syringe supply. Dr. Nolte responded that, currently, there are no such
expectations on Amazon, pharmacies, or any other locations that profit from
selling the same syringes; but unlike those entities, SSPs are actively involved
in helping people to properly dispose of their syringes.
Councilor Walker concluded public input on the matter and began to
read through the draft ordinance section by section.
Regarding “PURPOSE AND NEED” there were no objections to the section
as written.
Regarding “DEFINITIONS” Councilor Rice suggested expanding the
definition of mobile or pop-up exchanges to specifically include bicycles. Mayor
Grassie noted that the possible vehicles for mobile needle exchanges within
the definition were inclusive of (but not limited to) the list.
Regarding “LIMITATION ON SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM” there were
no objections to the section as written.
Regarding “LIMITATION ON THE LOCATION OF NEEDLE DISPOSAL
CONTAINER SITES” Councilor Walker objected to the limitations outlined. He
suggested that needle disposal containers should be permitted to be visible to
the public if that is necessary to maximize their effectiveness. Councilor
Gianotti inquired about what locations might host such containers. Councilor
Walker suggested that the locations should be determined in consultation with
SSPs.
Regarding “LIMITATION ON THE LOCATION OF SSP OPERATION” Mayor
Grassie objected to Item (B), suggesting that mobile or pop-up exchanges
should be permissible with explicit approval. Councilor Walker agreed with the
change. There was discussion about who should be responsible for approving
mobile and pop-up exchanges, in which it was determined that this
4
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
responsibility should be shared by the City Manager and the Police
Department.
Mayor Grassie additionally objected to a discrepancy between Items (C)
and (D), where it was unclear whether churches should or should not be
included in the list of locations near which SSPs are not permitted to operate.
Mayor Grassie argued that churches should be struck from the list, as each
church should be allowed to determine for itself whether it wishes to host SSPs
(if, for example, they align with the church’s charitable or humanitarian goals).
There was some discussion of the matter, in which it was noted that churches
which are also registered childcare centers would still be counted in
determining the exclusion zone. Councilor Walker declared that he would
strike “churches” from the list if there were no objections. None were stated.
Councilor Richardson additionally suggested amending the language of
Items (C) and (D) to replace “daycare” with the more inclusive “childcare.”
Regarding “REGISTRATION INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE SSP
OPERATOR” Councilor Rice suggested that an additional, municipal license
should be implemented for SSPs. Councilor Walker suggested that a new
license may be unnecessary so long as the City retains the authority to revoke
an SSP’s approval to operate at a location (as determined by the City Manager
and the Police Department). There was an inconclusive discussion about
whether or not the City would have the legal authority to implement a special
license requirement.
Regarding “DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION OF THE SSP” Mayor
Grassie read a section from the city of Manchester’s ordinance which limits
mobile and pop-up exchanges to only operate during hours approved by the
city. He suggested incorporating the same language here.
Regarding “SECURITY OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT” Councilor Rice
suggested changing all instances of the word “must” to “shall.” A discussion
ensued in which it remained inconclusive whether there was a difference
between the two words.
Councilor Rice additionally suggested amending Item (E) to include a
requirement for sewage, toilet, or sanitary facilities. There was some
discussion about what wording would be most accurate.
5
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
There was additional brief discussion clarifying the difference between
commercial and residential properties. Councilor Richardson noted that a
mixed-used building would still be considered a commercial property.
Councilor Rice inquired whether mobile SSPs are required to carry
containers for syringe storage or disposal. Councilor Walker confirmed that
they must. Councilor Rice inquired whether the vehicles utilized for mobile
SSPs need to be inspected and registered. Councilor Walker responded that
vehicle registration was not the purview of the syringe services ordinance.
Councilor Richardson inquired whether the wording of Item (H) would
still allow mobile or pop-up SSPs to operate safe injection sites. Director
McGinley clarified that no safe injection sites are legal to operate in the state.
Regarding “SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM OPERATIONS” Councilor Rice
inquired how SSPs verify an individual’s age to comply with Item (F). Director
McGinley responded that SSPs may request an ID before supplying syringes.
Councilor Rice inquired what would happen if a patron did not have proper ID.
Director McGinley responded that SSPs reserve to right to deny service to
anyone who they believe to be underage if verification is not possible. She
noted that there are no recorded cases of a minor ever having been provided
with syringes by an SSP in New Hampshire. She added that it is in the SSP’s
interest to ensure that no minor is provided with syringes, as it is already a
violation of state law to do so.
Regarding “DATA AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR SYRINGE
SERVICE PROGRAM” Mayor Grassie objected to the scope of information SSPs
would be required to report. Mayor Grassie inquired what is currently reported
to the State. Director McGinley responded that the reporting mandated under
the current RSA is minimal. She added that SSPs do collect demographic data
above and beyond what is required, but that they have to be careful about
what data is collected; legal precedent holds that certain demographic
information about people with substance abuse disorders is considered
personally identifying. Councilor Walker inquired if SSPs would be able to
collect all of the information listed in the draft ordinance. Director McGinley
responded that SSPs cannot legally collect and report data on residency. She
added that many patrons would be unwilling to volunteer the other information
6
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
requested. There was inconclusive debate about the value and consequences
of trying to collect this data.
Regarding “LAWFUL PARTICIPATION” there were no objections to the
section as written.
Regarding “ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES” there was discussion about
who should be responsible for enforcement under Item (A). Councilor Rice
suggested the Board of Health should be involved. Mayor Grassie objected
that syringe services did not fall under the Board’s purview. Councilor Walker
suggested that enforcement should be handled between the Police
Department and Code Enforcement.
Councilor Richardson suggested an alternate fine schedule for Item (B).
There was a discussion about what fines and penalties would be appropriate.
Councilor Walker and Mayor Grassie determined that the fine schedule as
written would be more compliant with legal precedent and state RSAs.
Returning to ““DATA AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR SYRINGE
SERVICE PROGRAM” Councilor Richardson suggested adding a line requiring
all reports to be submitted to the City’s Health Officer and the Chief of Police.
Councilor Horne suggested that the Council should review the purpose
and authority of the Board of Health.
Councilor Rice suggested outlining a procedure for residents to report
complaints about SSPs. Mayor Grassie responded that such a procedure would
be covered under the general provisions of the City Code for reporting
violations to the Police Department and Code Enforcement. Councilor Rice
suggested that the draft ordinance should include language referring to the
general provisions. There was some discussion about the exact wording.
Councilor Richardson suggested that SSPs should be required to label
syringes in order to identify the SSP providing them. There was some
discussion about the practicality and effectiveness of such a requirement.
Director McGinley noted that SSPs currently do not have a source of syringes
separate from the kind of syringes widely available via Amazon or local
pharmacies, and that because those syringes are secured in sterilized
packaging there is no way for an SSP to affix individual labels to them.
7
City of Rochester Codes and Ordinances Committee
Draft March 23, 2026
Councilor Walker recommended to focus on measures targeting cleanup and
managing the supply of syringes first.
Returning to “ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES” Councilor Richardson
suggested that an SSP’s operating privileges should be revoked after four
violations. Director McGinley noted that the City already reserves the authority
to revoke an SSP’s approval to operate regardless of the number of violations.
Councilor Richardson insisted that there should be a hard number of violations
after which operating privileges are revoked automatically. Councilor Gianotti
asked how long an SSPs would have its operating privileges revoked for.
Councilor Richardson responded that there would be no definitive timeframe
for the revocation.
Councilor Rice inquired about mandating a syringe litter cleanup
program within the ordinance. Councilor Walker responded that the City would
be investigating the option for a public syringe disposal box program similar
to the city of Dover. It was reiterated that forcing SSPs to specially label
syringes for tracking purposes would not be a practicable solution to syringe
litter. Councilor Giannotti inquired what current syringe cleanup procedures
looked liked. Councilor Walker responded that small-scale cleanup is currently
handled by the Police Department, while large-scale cleanup is contracted out
to a private company specializing in hazardous materials.
Councilor Walker stated that he would prepare a new draft of the
ordinance incorporating the suggestions from his meeting, to be made
available for the next regular meeting of the Committee. Councilor Rice
inquired whether there would be a Public Hearing on the ordinance. Councilor
Walker confirmed that a Public Hearing would be held once the ordinance was
ready to be sent to the full Council.
4. Adjournment
Councilor Rice MOVED to ADJOURN the Codes and Ordinances
Committee meeting at 8:08 PM. Councilor Gianotti seconded the motion. The
MOTION CARRIED by a unanimous voice vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Austin S. Leavitt
Deputy City Clerk
8
Agenda
SPECIAL CODES AND ORDINANCES COMMITTEE
of the Rochester City Council
Monday, March 23, 2026
Council Chambers
6:00 PM
Agenda
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Discussions
3.1 Discussion: New Article III of City Ordinances
Chapter 94, Syringe Service Program and Needle
Disposal
4. Adjournment
1 of 12
Intentionally
left blank…
City Clerk’s Office
2 of 12
SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM AND NEEDLE DISPOSAL
PURPOSE AND NEED.
Whereas, the regulation of Syringe Service Programs ("SSPs") and disposal sites is
necessary to ensure that such programs operate in conformity with New Hampshire law,
demonstrate a plan and implementation for injection drug users to seek treatment for
substance abuse, and require the removal of syringe litter from public and private
property; whereas the City of Rochester is attempting to coordinate all local agencies,
organizations, and providers into a comprehensive prevention program to best facilitate
these practices; and whereas the purpose of this subchapter is to protect the health, safety,
and welfare of the public and of the use of the environment by coordinating syringe service
programs and needle disposal sites.
DEFINITIONS.
The following words shall have the meanings ascribed to them unless the text requires or
specifies a different meaning:
CITY. The City of Rochester, New Hampshire.
DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. All equipment, products, and materials of any kind that are used
or intended for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting,
manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing,
analyzing, packaging, repackaging, storing, containing, concealing, injecting, ingesting,
inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a scheduled drug in violation of
R.S.A. 318-B:1 et seq.
FACILITY. A building or area within a building, which is a permanent structure, having
one or more floors and a roof, which is used for the housing or enclosure of persons or
property.
MOBILE OR POP-UP EXCHANGE. Syringe service programs conducted through a variety of
delivery methods which include, but are not limited to: mobile vans, cars, motorcycles or
mopeds, and backpacked pedestrians; these terms also refer to the delivery of program
services in any way other than in a fixed facility.
NEEDLE DISPOSAL CONTAINER. Any rigid puncture-resistant container used for the
collection of discarded needles or other sharps.
OPERATOR. The contracted provider of a syringe service program.
3 of 12
SAFE OR SUPERVISED INJECTION SITES. Medically supervised facilities designed to
provide a hygienic environment in which drug addicts are able to consume illicit
recreational drugs intravenously.
SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM (SSP). A sterile needle and needle exchange program
authorized by R.S.A. 318-B:43.
LIMITATION ON SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM (SSP)
SSP Will be allowable ONLY on a ONE FOR ONE NEEDLE EXCHANGE within the city of
Rochester
LIMITATION ON THE LOCATION OF NEEDLE DISPOSAL CONTAINER SITES.
Needle disposal containers must not be visible to the general public from any publicly
owned space or right-of-way.
LIMITATION ON THE LOCATION OF SSP OPERATION.
(A) An SSP may operate at a fixed, secure facility approved by the City of Rochester
(B) A mobile or pop-up exchange SSP program is NOT PERMISSABLE within the city of
Rochester.
(C) No SSP facility will be allowed to operate within 750 feet of any playground, library,
or state-licensed daycare facility; and no SSP facility shall be located within a drug-free
school zone as defined in R.S.A. 193-B:1, II. For these purposes, the city will publish,
maintain and update an accurate and up-to-date map identifying the location and address
of parks, playgrounds, libraries, state-licensed daycare facilities and drug free school zones
within the City of Rochester.
(D) For the purpose of this section, measurements shall be made in a straight line,
without regard to the intervening structures or objects, from the nearest portion of the
building or structure used as a part of the premises for a needle exchange program to the
nearest property line of a church, library, daycare center, or to the nearest boundary of a
park or playground.
REGISTRATION INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE SSP OPERATOR.
4 of 12
(A) An SSP shall file with the City of Rochester a full copy of all the registration materials
provided to the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services and reports
pursuant to R.S.A. 318-B:43, II.
(B) An SSP shall maintain a list of all staff and volunteers of the SSP.
(C) An SSP shall register with the City of Rochester within 30 days of registering with the
NH Department of Health and Human Services.
DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION OF THE SSP.
(A) An SSP facility, in coordinating with local agencies pursuant to R.S.A. 318-B:43, II (b),
may propose but shall only operate on days and hours approved by the City of Rochester.
(B) A request by an SSP to amend the days and hours of its operation may be submitted
to the City of Rochester to be considered in conjunction with the days and hours of
operation of other SSPs to minimize the duplication of effort. In the event of a Public
Health Emergency or outbreak of disease, the City of Rochester may adjust days and hours
of operation to best address public health needs.
SECURITY OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.
Criteria for a fixed facility include, but are not limited to:
(A) A primary entrance and emergency exit with doors and locking mechanisms;
(B) Needle disposal containers for securing previously used needles and other
paraphernalia;
(C) Must be accessible to vehicle and foot traffic, to include legal parking areas;
(D) Must have ADA access for consumers;
(E) Must have electricity and running water availability;
(F) Must be a commercial type property and not residential;
(G) Must be in a well-lighted area for both primary entrance and emergency exits, for
safety issues;
(H) The fixed facility will not be used for a "safe or supervised injection site" of any
nature in the city; and
5 of 12
(I) The operator shall provide for the safety and security of the site where needles are
exchanged and of any equipment used under the needle exchange program, and shall
establish written security procedures. These security procedures shall be included in the
operator's training and on-boarding process for all contractors, employees, and volunteers
assisting in the needle exchange program.
SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM OPERATIONS.
(A) An SSP shall operate in the city only if registered with the NH Department of Health
and Human Services pursuant to R.S.A. 318-B:43, II.
(B) All SSPs shall coordinate with the City of Rochester to create a comprehensive
prevention program for people who inject drugs to minimize duplication of effort. Such
coordination shall include following the City of Rochester’s direction in response to a public
health emergency or outbreak.
(C) An SSP shall supply its list of all staff and volunteers of the SSP to the City of
Rochester. Any changes to the list will be immediately updated and reported to the city of
Rochester. An SSP will Provide the forementioned list immediately upon request of the city
of Rochester.
(D) An SSP shall operate to an exchange-only basis of a ONE FOR ONE EXCHANGE
whereby an SSP participant shall receive sterile needles and needle units only by providing
the SSP with a used one, and only in the same quantity received. An SSP shall provide only
the drug paraphernalia permitted under R.S.A. 318-B:43.
(E) Whenever needles are exchanged or provided, the SSP shall offer educational
materials regarding the transmission of HlV, viral hepatitis, and other bloodborne diseases,
as well as educational materials regarding available treatment and recovery services.
(F) SSPs shall not knowingly distribute syringes to persons less than 18 years of age.
(G) SSPs shall comply with all New Hampshire statutes, rules, and regulations.
(H) SSPs shall not accept any form of remuneration from consumers for delivering
exchange service program services.
(I) Staff and their representatives shall carry identification and a copy of their SSP's
registration while conducting SSP business.
(J) SSPs shall provide consumer enrollment guidelines that include notifying all
consumers regarding rules and laws applicable to SSPs.
6 of 12
DATA AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM.
An SSP shall provide to the city on a quarterly basis a copy of the reports submitted to the
State pursuant to R.S.A. 318-B:43, II(f), and shall provide additional data by agreement. No
personal identifying information of an SSP participant shall be submitted for any purpose.
An SSP will provide on a quarterly basis to the city of Rochester a report detailing the
number of needles distributed, needles collected, number of people participating in the
program, age group of participants, 18-30, 31-40, 41-50, 60+. An SSP report will also
include the residency of participants, as well as gender.
LAWFUL PARTICIPATION
Pursuant to R.S.A. 318-B:44 it is an affirmative defense, to prosecution for possession of a
hypodermic syringe or needle, as provided in R.S.A. 626:7, that the item was obtained
through participation in a syringe service program. Nothing in that section shall be
construed as an affirmative defense for any offense other than as set forth under R.S.A. 318-
B:26, Il(f). SSPs shall comply with all applicable laws.
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES.
(A) This subchapter shall be enforced by City of Rochester, the Department of Public
Works. Such enforcement authority is in addition to, and shall not restrict, the authority
currently possessed by any City Department including, but not limited to, the Manchester
Police Department to enforce the requirements of this subchapter.
(B) Anyone found guilty of violating any provision of this subchapter shall be subject to a
fine of not less than $100 nor more than $1,000. Each day such a violation occurs shall
constitute a new and separate offense.
7 of 12
Intentionally
left blank…
City Clerk’s Office
8 of 12
City of Rochester, New Hampshire
Office of The City Manager
31 Wakefield Street • Rochester, NH 03867
(603) 332-7500
www.RochesterNH.gov
MEMORANDUM
TO: Codes and Ordinances Committee
FROM: Katie Ambrose, City Manager
DATE: March 3, 2026
SUBJECT: Requested Data on Municipal Impact of Discarded Syringes
At the February 5, 2026, Codes and Ordinances Committee meeting, members requested additional
data on the potential impacts to City services related to discarded needles and the cleanup thereof.
The following is a summary of information documented over the past 5 years regarding syringe-
related service calls, departments and staff affected, and a quantification of the discarded materials
collected:
Emergency Services Response (2021–2025)
Annual Service Calls
Year Service Calls PD Disposals EMS Disposals Fire Disposals DPW Disposals
2021 190 86 9 1 1
2022 155 72 5 1 —
2023 111 60 1 — —
2024 104 72 — — —
2025 82 42 — — —
Five-Year Total (2021–2025 full years):
• 560 service calls
• 290+ documented disposal incidents
The quantity of emergency personnel responses for these discarded needle calls includes
circumstances with both confirmed needles and reports where needles were not located in the area
9 of 12
where staff were directed:
• 2021: 10 public location reports (library, parks, schools) where no needles were found
• 2022: 9 not found
• 2023: 6 not found
• 2025: 10 not found
Even when no syringes are ultimately recovered from a call, emergency personnel must respond,
investigate, and document these cases. Although the calls for service have steadily declined over the
past 5 years, they remain a regular occurrence for police, fire, and EMS staff.
Police staff participated in a 9/20/2024 cleanup of several encampment sites as well as cleanups of
multiple areas/streets where needles have been known to be discarded.
This cleanup resulted in:
• 2 full sharps containers collected, with primarily uncapped needles (These sharps containers
hold 100+ needles.)
• Multiple empty syringe 10-pack wrappers recovered
Click HERE to view pictures from these cleanup locations.
Police staff also report communications from residents in the area of United Methodist Church
regarding ongoing issues with discarded syringes. In one incident, it was reported that a dog
ingested a syringe that had been discarded into its owner’s yard.
Since 2015 (as reported in THIS Foster’s article), Rochester Fire, Police, and EMS have
implemented sharps container placement in first-responder vehicles to aid and streamline in disposal
and address recurring weekly calls for found needles.
There have been documented syringe/needle cleanups or identifications in the following public
locations. This excludes the encampments and street cleanups mentioned prior:
• Spaulding High School
• William Allen School
• School Street School
• McClelland School
• Rochester Middle School
• Rochester Community Center
2 10 of 12
• Rochester Public Library
• James W. Foley Memorial Community Center
• Rochester Common
• Dominicus Hanson Park (The Pines)
• Gonic Trails
• Emmanuel Childcare Center
Rochester Public Library
The Rochester Public Library has installed permanent sharps containers on each floor of the facility.
Library staff have reported the need for routine needle disposal involving the Custodian, Patron
Services Supervisor, and Library Director.
Exterior:
• An average 3–5 needles are found most mornings (except during winter months)
• Likely associated with overnight occupancy of unhoused people on the ramp leading to the
entrance
Interior:
• 1–3 needles found daily in trash cans
• It has been a necessity for the public bathrooms to be shut down multiple times per week due to
blood splatter.
• There have been 2 separate incidents which required toilet removal to clear flushed needles,
which necessitated the help of 3 Buildings and Grounds staff
In the warmer months when the library offers Outdoor Children’s Programming, staff reports that prior
to the programs:
• 15–20 minutes is spent sweeping grounds for needles and paraphernalia before participants
are allowed in the area (3 Library assistants, 2 lead librarians, and patrons services supervisors
all involved in these reviews)
• 2–4 needles found on average during each sweep
In 2025, the library reported that they had 68 outdoor programs scheduled. Without the
aforementioned pre-program sweeps, this outdoor programming would not be feasible due to the risk
posed to participants. There is no winter programming scheduled outdoors, not primarily due to the
weather, but rather due to risk of concealed needles under snow.
Human Resources
In recent years there have been 2 reports of employee needle stick injuries when removing trash
bags from restrooms in city buildings.
3 11 of 12
Public Buildings and Grounds
Since 2020, SERVPRO has been contracted by the City 21 times for the clean-up of encampment
sites, the total cost of which was $53,391 or approximately $10,679 per year.
Although there is not individual syringe data for each cleanup, following one such October 2024
ServePro cleanup event at The Pines, Buildings and Grounds reported that there were 75–100
needles collected and discarded.
Recreation
Since November 2024, there have been 21 documented needles disposed of by Recreation staff in
The Pines, with numerous needle caps found without an associated syringe.
An additional attendant was assigned in January 2025 with a focus on The Pines and the
Squamanagonic areas.
Needle disposal is now an ongoing maintenance function within Parks operations through three
facilities positions. Click HERE to view a photo of needles found at the Common Playground in the fall
of 2023.
NEEDLE EXCHANGE PROGRAM DATA (SSP)
Based on Reporting through DHHS:
“Hand up Health Services” NH Harm reduction coalition (serving Dover, Rochester*, and
Somersworth)
o There was an average of 32,828 needles distributed quarterly (or approximately 8,207 per
month) amongst these three communities.
o There was an average of 31,120 needles taken back.
o An average of 1,708 needles, or 5.3% of those needles distributed, not returned.
*Please note that this data is not Rochester specific, but takes into account three communities served
by this organization.
“SOS” (serving Dover, Rochester*, Exeter, and mobile SSP program)
o There was an average of 98,697 needles distributed quarterly in Rochester (or approximately
24,674 a month)
o There was an average of 78,632 needles taken back.
o An average of 20,065 needles, or 20.4% of those needles distributed, not returned
4 12 of 12
Get email alerts for Rochester
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.