Written by Andrew Horn of Amherst, NH
 |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HB 629-FN – Dam Tax Debate
Why It’s Notable: Would impose new fees on boat registrations and waterfront properties to fund state dam maintenance, sparking strong opposition from waterfront owners.HB 635-FN – Immigration Nonprofit Tax
Why It’s Notable: Targets nonprofits that settle illegal immigrants by stripping their tax-exempt status and offering bounties to those who report them, stirring major ethical and legal debates.SB 83-FN – Video Lottery Terminals
Why It’s Notable: Authorizes VLTs (similar to slot machines) for charitable gaming venues, creating a fund to reimburse certain property tax exemptions—significant expansion of gambling.SB 168-FN-L – Online Gambling Launch
Why It’s Notable: Legalizes and regulates online gambling in New Hampshire, redirecting a portion of proceeds to reimburse local property tax exemptions.HB 688-FN-L – Charitable Gaming Tax
Why It’s Notable: Allows municipalities to levy a special enterprise tax on large charitable gaming operators, affecting local charities and raising concerns over nonprofit funding.HB 582-FN – Watercraft Age Restriction
Why It’s Notable: Proposes a minimum operating age of 16 for personal watercraft and bans nighttime use, drawing intense opposition from recreational boaters.HB 585 – Religious Rental Exemption
Why It’s Notable: Expands property tax exemptions for religious organizations that rent parsonages or worship buildings, fueling debate on fairness and church-state boundaries.SB 244-FN-A – Medicaid Rate Hike
Why It’s Notable: Increases Medicaid provider rates and invests in health workforce recruitment, seen as critical to addressing healthcare shortages but costly for the state.HB 644-FN – Drone Park Access
Why It’s Notable: Ends a near-ban on drones in state parks by creating a structured system of permissions, fees, and fines—balancing recreation interests with privacy/safety concerns.SB 137-FN – Postpartum Medicaid Coverage
Why It’s Notable: Requires Medicaid to cover administrative “swing bed” days for postpartum parents and newborns, drawing attention to hospital stay reimbursements and maternal health.
Contents
Quick Summaries - Part 2 of 2
In-Depth Analyses - Part 2 of 2
Quick Summaries - Part 2 of 2
House Resources, Recreation And Development
HB 568 (6 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Allows subdivision regulations on water supply studies and private well testing
Online Testimony: 10 support, 3 opposeHB 582-FN (2 sponsors, Democratic)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Sets new safety rules for personal watercraft, including age and nighttime restrictions
Online Testimony: 5 support, 34 opposeHB 595-FN (12 sponsors, Lean Democratic)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Establishes coastal resilience zones with new flood resiliency funding options
Online Testimony: 12 support, 4 opposeHB 607-FN (3 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Funds Hampton Beach area commission with a $5,000 annual appropriation
Online Testimony: 4 support, 3 opposeHB 624-FN-A (2 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Creates a grant program for local river management advisory committees, appropriating $40,000 yearly
Online Testimony: 18 support, 3 opposeHB 629-FN (3 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Proposes fees on boat registrations and waterfront properties to fund state-owned dam maintenance
Online Testimony: 3 support, 23 opposeHB 644-FN (8 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Permits commercial and recreational drone use in state parks with specific exceptions and fees
Online Testimony: 9 support, 5 opposeHB 657-FN (1 sponsor, Republican)
Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development
Summary: Requires a short-notice reservation system prioritizing local NH residents for day-use at state parks
Online Testimony: 1 support, 1 oppose
House Ways And Means
HB 650-FN (5 sponsors, Lean Republican)
Committee: House Ways and Means
Summary: Removes references to repealed funds, splits the state park fund, caps robotics education fund
Online Testimony: 2 support, 3 opposeHB 585 (4 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: House Ways and Means
Summary: Allows religious organizations to exempt certain rentals if rental income funds religious programs
Online Testimony: 1 support, 13 opposeHB 688-FN-L (4 sponsors, Lean Democratic)
Committee: House Ways and Means
Summary: Authorizes municipalities to tax large charitable gaming facilities based on enterprise value
Online Testimony: 4 support, 20 opposeHB 737-L (8 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: House Ways and Means
Summary: Allows localities to prohibit “games of chance” by municipal vote
Online Testimony: 7 support, 1 opposeHB 635-FN (1 sponsor, Republican)
Committee: House Ways and Means
Summary: Taxes nonprofits settling illegal immigrants and offers a reporting bounty program
Online Testimony: 28 support, 196 oppose
Senate Executive Departments And Administration
SB 178 (1 sponsor, Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Directs DHHS to adopt rules for water testing fees, moving fee-setting authority to rulemakingSB 179-FN (1 sponsor, Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Administratively attaches the State Council on Housing Stability to the Department of Health and Human ServicesSB 180-FN (6 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Declares Coos County a distressed place-based economy, mandating collaborative regulationsSB 181-FN (9 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Presumes firefighters’ cancers are work-related, requiring timely workers’ compensation paymentsSB 187-FN (7 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Adopts the Dentist and Dental Hygienist Compact, streamlining interstate licensureSB 185-FN (16 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Sets timelines for professional misconduct probes by the Office of Professional LicensureSB 188-FN (6 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Allows private engineers or architects to inspect and certify building code complianceSB 194-FN (4 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Lowers cosmetology hours from 1,500 to 1,200 and adds a career-technical board memberSB 196-FN (7 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Increases project-cost threshold for agencies exempt from competitive bidding, from $500K to $1MSB 199-FN (15 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Creates a recruitment and retention incentive program for new NH state troopersSB 201-FN (1 sponsor, Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Permits unclassified positions to convert into classified exempt salary roles, modifies benefits rulesSB 286-FN (4 sponsors, Lean Republican)
Committee: Senate Executive Departments and Administration
Summary: Creates an Office of Film and Creative Media, offering incentives to attract film productions
Senate Health And Human Services
SB 132-FN (14 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Health and Human Services
Summary: Expands prosthetic device insurance coverage to adults, including activity-specific prostheticsSB 122-FN (10 sponsors, Lean Democratic)
Committee: Senate Health and Human Services
Summary: Removes asset test and raises income eligibility for the Medicare Savings ProgramSB 244-FN-A (11 sponsors, Democratic)
Committee: Senate Health and Human Services
Summary: Improves access to primary care, boosts Medicaid rates, and funds workforce recruitmentSB 137-FN (1 sponsor, Democratic)
Committee: Senate Health and Human Services
Summary: Requires Medicaid coverage for certain hospital “administrative days,” including postpartum careSB 134-FN (9 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Health and Human Services
Summary: Directs DHHS to reapply for a waiver imposing community engagement/work requirements in Medicaid
Senate Ways And Means
SB 60-FN (5 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Ways and Means
Summary: Authorizes advanced deposit wagering on horse races, channeling taxes to the education trust fundSB 63-FN (9 sponsors, Bipartisan)
Committee: Senate Ways and Means
Summary: Expands the Division of Travel and Tourism’s budget by adjusting meals and rooms tax calculationsSB 275 (8 sponsors, Lean Democratic)
Committee: Senate Ways and Means
Summary: Grants certain child care agencies property tax relief and clarifies preschool facility aid rulesSB 83-FN (5 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Ways and Means
Summary: Allows video lottery terminals at charitable gaming locations, creates fund for property tax exemptionsSB 168-FN-L (4 sponsors, Republican)
Committee: Senate Ways and Means
Summary: Regulates and taxes online gambling, dedicating proceeds to reimburse local property tax exemptions
In-Depth Analyses - Part 2 of 2
House Resources, Recreation And Development
HB 568
AN ACT allowing subdivision regulations concerning water supply.
6 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Kat McGhee (D), Rep. Kate Murray (D), Rep. Nancy Murphy (D), Rep. Rosemarie Rung (D), Rep. Diane Pauer (R), Rep. Bill Boyd (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Subparagraphs; Planning and Zoning; Subdivision Regulations; Water Supply. Amend RSA 674:36, II by inserting after subparagraph (o) the following new subparagraphs:
(p) Local planning boards may request a water supply study in accordance with local regulations to ensure water adequacy as housing density increases. Water studies for new subdivisions are discretionary and fall under the jurisdiction of local planning boards. This provision shall not apply to community water systems or large groundwater withdrawals regulated under RSA 485 and RSA 485-C.
(q) Include provisions to ensure there is an adequate water quantity to support existing, proposed, and reasonably anticipated future land and associated water uses, and to ensure the protection of water-dependent natural resources. Such provisions shall be established and administered in accordance with plans developed and approved under RSA 674:2. This provision shall not apply to community water systems or large groundwater withdrawals regulated under RSA 485 and RSA 485-C.
(r) Prescribe minimum on-lot private well testing requirements to ensure an adequate water supply. This provision shall not apply to community water systems or large groundwater withdrawals regulated under RSA 485 and RSA 485-C.
2 New Paragraph; Planning and Zoning; Subdivision Regulations; Costs. Amend RSA 674:36 by inserting after paragraph VI the following new paragraph:
VII. The planning board may, as part of its subdivision regulations, require an applicant to pay for notifying abutters and may assess reasonable costs for local administrative or investigative expenses deemed necessary for more complex applications.
Summary:
This bill allows local planning boards to adopt subdivision regulations requiring water supply studies, ensuring adequate water quantity for future uses, and establishing minimum on-lot private well testing requirements, while also clarifying that applicants are responsible for associated costs.
Argument For:
This bill addresses the growing concern of water resource impacts from increased development by empowering local planning boards to require water supply studies and adequate water quantity provisions for new subdivisions, protecting both water resources and future residents.
Potential Argument Against:
None
Online Testimony
Currently, 10 people support and 3 people oppose the bill. 77% support of 13 people
Support
I am a member of my town planning board and have expressed concerns about the impact of ever increasing development upon water resources. As such, I am in favor of this legislation. However, it would be helpful to provide some basic parameters for local boards. Perhaps, a provision could be added indicating adherence for subdivisions of 4 or more lots.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 582-FN
AN ACT relative to safety requirements for operation of personal water crafts.
2 sponsors, Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Will Darby (D), Rep. Rosemarie Rung (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
2 New Section; Personal Water Craft; Operation. Amend RSA 270 by inserting after section 74-c the following new section:
270:74-d Operation of Personal Water Craft.
I. No person shall:
(a) Operate a personal water craft on any lake, pond, or river unless the person is 16 years of age or older.
(b) Operate, control, or be transported on a personal water craft on any lake, pond, or river between the hours of sunset and sunrise.
(c) Operate a personal water craft or be a passenger on a personal water craft unless he or she is wearing a Coast Guard approved personal floatation device worn according to the directions provided on the device and for its intended purpose.
II. A person who violates any of the provisions of paragraph I shall be guilty of a violation.
III. In addition to the provisions of RSA 270:29-a, no person shall operate a personal water craft in a careless or negligent manner, or in a manner which unreasonably or unnecessarily endangers life, limb, or property, including but not limited to, weaving through congested watercraft traffic and swerving at the last moment to avoid collision. A person who violates this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Summary:
This bill defines "personal water craft," prohibits operation by those under 16, restricts nighttime operation, mandates personal floatation devices, and prohibits careless or negligent operation.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves water safety by adding regulations for the operation of personal watercraft.
Argument Against:
This bill enhances safety on New Hampshire lakes and rivers by establishing minimum age requirements for personal watercraft operation, restricting nighttime use, and mandating the use of personal floatation devices, thereby reducing accidents and promoting responsible boating practices.
Online Testimony
Currently, 5 people support and 34 people oppose the bill. 87% oppose of 39 people
Opposition
Absurd. I first ran a jet ski on Newfound Lake when I was 10. I ran larger boats in salt water around the same time, maybe younger. A bit of instruction, some left/right limits, and some supervision. You can't be the boy/girl in a bubble until you're 87. Eventually you've got to go out and figure out how things work. Bumps and bruises add to the education. Quit contributing to a weaker country with dumb stuff like this bill.
This is vague, imprecise and extremely subject to misinterpretation. "... operate a personal water craft in a careless or negligent manner, or in a manner which unreasonably or unnecessarily endangers life, limb, or property, including but not limited to, weaving through congested watercraft traffic and swerving at the last moment to avoid collision."
We have enough safety regulations; our state motto is "Live free or die" not "add on more rules in order to make more revenue via fines and court fees".
stop imposing more regulations on pwc!
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:30 a.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 595-FN
AN ACT relative to coastal resilience zones.
12 sponsors, Lean Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Chris Muns (D), Rep. Aboul Khan (R), Rep. Dennis Malloy (D), Rep. Michael Edgar (D), Rep. Jim Maggiore (D), Rep. Jaci Grote (D), Rep. Zoe Manos (D), Rep. Peggy Balboni (D), Rep. Erica de Vries (D), Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Debra Altschiller (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 District; Energy Efficiency and Clean Energy Districts. Amend RSA 53-F:1, II to read as follows:
II. "District" means an energy efficiency and clean energy, or flood resilience district established under this chapter.
2 Definitions; Qualifying Improvement. Amend RSA 53-F:1, III to read as follows:
III. "Qualifying improvement" means:
…
(b) “Flood resiliency improvement” means providing flood and water damage mitigation and resiliency improvements, prioritizing repairs, replacement, or improvements that qualify for reductions in flood insurance premiums, including raising a structure above the base flood elevation to reduce flood damage; constructing a flood diversion apparatus, drainage gate, or seawall improvement, including seawall repairs and seawall replacements; purchasing flood damage-resistant building materials; or making electrical, mechanical, plumbing, or other system improvements that reduce flood damage.
…
4 Authority. Amend RSA 53-F:3 to read as follows:
53-F:3 Authority.
To achieve the public benefits of protecting the economic and social well-being by reducing energy costs and enhancing resiliency in the community and risks to the community associated with future escalation in energy prices, threats to public and private property from more frequent and severe flooding, and addressing the threat of global climate change, any municipality which has adopted the provisions of this chapter and established [an energy efficiency and clean energy] a district may, upon a finding by the governing body of the municipality, after notice and hearing, that the [energy conservation and efficiency and clean energy] qualifying improvements will serve the public purposes as set forth in this chapter and not primarily be for the benefit of private persons or uses even though such private benefits and uses may incidentally result, do the following:
I. A municipality which adopts this chapter shall thereafter be authorized to establish one or more [energy efficiency and clean energy] districts.
II. Encourage private financing from individuals or institutions for qualifying improvements to eligible properties within the district and enter into agreements with those private lenders to administer the [energy conservation and efficiency improvements or clean energy] qualifying improvements program on their behalf, including evaluating eligible properties, supervising the improvements, arranging for the closing of the loans, collecting the special assessments, and assisting them with the exercise of their lienholder rights, provided that anticipated expenses for the administration of the program shall be borne by the owners of eligible properties participating in the program.
III. Participate in state or federal programs providing support for municipal [energy efficiency and clean energy finance] qualifying improvements programs such as those authorized by this chapter.
IV. Enter into agreements with owners of eligible property in which the owners consent to make [energy conservation and efficiency improvements or clean energy] qualifying improvements to their properties and to have the municipality include a special assessment to pay for such improvements on their property tax bills, their bills for water or sewer service or another municipal service, or separate bills, provided that such agreements shall not affect the tax liability or municipal services charges of other participating or nonparticipating property owners in the district.
V. Collect charges from participating owners of eligible properties to cover the cost of administration for the district.
VI. Otherwise administer a program for promoting and financing [energy efficiency and clean energy] qualifying improvements within a district in accordance with this chapter, enter into an agreement with a public or private entity to administer such a program on its behalf in accordance with this chapter, and enter into an agreement with one or more other municipalities to share services and otherwise cooperate in the administration of a district or districts in accordance with this chapter.
VII. Adoption of a [clean energy efficiency and clean energy] a district shall include a commercial property assessed clean energy (C-PACE) and residential property assessed clean energy (R-PACE) model implemented according to the most recent U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released best practice guidelines for PACE financing programs.
Summary:
This bill expands the definition of qualifying improvements for C-PACE and R-PACE funding to include flood resiliency improvements, allows municipalities to offer property tax abatements or freezes for flood resilience projects, enables municipalities to assess fees for a flood resilience investment fund, and appropriates funds for a statewide analysis of flood risk and mitigation.
Argument For:
This bill provides crucial tools for New Hampshire communities to proactively address the increasing threats of flooding and severe storms. By offering tax incentives and creating dedicated funding, the bill empowers municipalities and homeowners to invest in flood resilience projects, safeguarding homes and neighborhoods, and reducing the risks and economic costs associated with future disasters.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may impose additional financial burdens on property owners and could face challenges in implementation and administration.
Online Testimony
Currently, 12 people support and 4 people oppose the bill. 75% support of 16 people
Support
With the number and price tag of disasters of all sorts increasing—and the future response of the federal government uncertain at best—ensuring coastal homes and neighborhoods can survive means taking action locally. This bill would put more tools into the toolboxes of seacoast communities to take action to help people stay in the homes they love more safely and with less risk.
—David Meuse, of Portsmouth who is, An Elected Official
Coastal areas are becoming more and more vulnerable to severe storms and flooding. This bill helps by allowing local governments to offer property owners tax breaks or freezes for a certain period if they invest in flood resilience projects. It also gives municipalities the option to charge a fee on properties in flood-prone areas, with the money going into a dedicated fund for flood resilience efforts.
—Jennifer Mandelbaum, of Portsmouth who is, An Elected Official
NH Sierra Club supports this bill with the addition of low cost natural measures that capture, filter, and reduce stormwater to the definition of qualifying improvements. As an investment into the property, these natural stormwater infrastructure improvements stay in the property and benefit the entire community. Please support the bill with this addition.
—C NH Sierra Club Corkery, of Concord who is A Lobbyist, representing Sierra Club NH CHapter
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 11:00 a.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 607-FN
AN ACT relative to funding the Hampton Beach area commission and making appropriations therefor.
3 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Chris Muns (D), Rep. Michael Edgar (D), Rep. Nicholas Bridle (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Hampton Beach Master Plan Fund. Amend RSA 216-J:5 to read as follows:
216-J:5 Hampton Beach Master Plan Fund. There is hereby established in the office of the state treasurer a fund to be known as the Hampton Beach master plan fund which shall be kept separate and distinct from all other funds and shall be continually appropriated to the commission. Such fund shall be the depository of all gifts, grants, [or] donations made to the commission pursuant to RSA 216-J:4, and any other funds appropriated pursuant to this section. Implementation expenses, the expenses of the commission, its commissioners, [and] any employees of the commission, and operations and initiatives of the commission, shall be paid from such fund. Any moneys in such fund shall not lapse into the general fund of the state.
2 Appropriation.
I. A sum of $5,000 is hereby appropriated to the Hampton Beach master plan fund established under RSA 216-J:5 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2025, and ending June 30, 2026, for the purposes of funding the operations and initiatives of the commission.
II. A sum of $5,000 is hereby appropriated to the Hampton Beach master plan fund established under RSA 216-J:5 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026, and ending June 30, 2027, for the purposes of funding the operations and initiatives of the commission.
III. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Summary:
This bill amends RSA 216-J:5 to include operations and initiatives of the Hampton Beach area commission in the uses for the Hampton Beach master plan fund and appropriates $5,000 annually for two fiscal years to that fund.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures the Hampton Beach master plan fund can support the essential operations and initiatives of the commission, enhancing the area's appeal and economic vitality.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill's appropriation may be unnecessary or could be better used to fund other pressing state needs.
Online Testimony
Currently, 4 people support and 3 people oppose the bill. 57% support of 7 people
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 11:30 a.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 624-FN-A
AN ACT establishing a local river management advisory committee grant program and making an appropriation therefor.
2 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Eric Turer (D), Rep. James Creighton (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Local River Management Advisory Committee Grants. Amend RSA 483 by inserting after section 8-a the following new section:
483:8-b Local River Management Advisory Committee Grants. There is hereby established a grant program, to be administered by the department of environmental services, for the allocation of funds to local river management advisory committees established under RSA 483:8-a. Funding requests made under this section may be submitted to the department of environmental services by any established local river management advisory committee, detailing resources needed to fulfill its duties as described in RSA 483:8-a. Funding requests may not exceed $10,000 for any local river management advisory committee in any year. The commissioner of the department of environmental services shall adopt rules under RSA 541-A, relative to grant application and distribution procedures.
2 Appropriation; Local River Management Advisory Committee Grants. The sum of $40,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026, and $40,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 is hereby appropriated to the department of environmental services for the distribution of local river management advisory committee grants established in RSA 483:8-b. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sum out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Summary:
This bill establishes a grant program administered by the Department of Environmental Services to provide funding to local river management advisory committees, appropriating $40,000 for fiscal years 2026 and 2027.
Argument For:
This bill provides much-needed funding to support local river management advisory committees, enabling them to effectively carry out their duties in protecting and restoring the health of New Hampshire's rivers, benefiting both the environment and the state's economy.
Argument Against:
This bill provides much-needed funding to support local river management advisory committees, enabling them to effectively carry out their duties in protecting and restoring the health of New Hampshire's rivers, benefiting both the environment and the state's economy.
Online Testimony
Currently, 18 people support and 3 people oppose the bill. 86% support of 21 people
Support
NH LAKES supports House Bill 624-FN-A, which would provide a funding source for unfunded mandates charged to the state’s local river management advisory committees (LACs) as part of the state’s Rivers Management and Protection Program since its inception. This modest expenditure will help protect and restore the health of New Hampshire's rivers. Clean and healthy rivers are important to our state for many reasons.
—Andrea, NH LAKES LaMoreaux, of Concord who is A Lobbyist, representing NH LAKES
Our lakes and our rivers need our help to stay healthy for the animals and plants and for the people who recreate there. The rivers feed and connect our lakes and contribute to the overall well being of our great state. Without healthy lakes and rivers, NH would suffer environmentally and fiscally. This bill is an important step in the right direction and I fully support it.
—Laura Dunham, of Center Barnstead
Opposition
This is stated to be ADVISORY committee and therefore deserves no funds because it performs no action.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:00 p.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 629-FN
AN ACT funding the operation maintenance and repair of state dams.
3 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Peter Leishman (D), Rep. Michael Harrington (R), Rep. Mike Ouellet (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Vessel Registration and Numbering; Registration Fees. Amend RSA 270-E:5, II to read as follows:
II. In addition to the fees required by paragraph I there shall be the following registration fees:
(a) $5 [collected] for each registration processed by an authorized agent of the department who is not an employee of the department. The fees collected under this [paragraph] subparagraph shall be collected and retained by the authorized agent as compensation for processing the registration.
(b) $5 for each registration specified in paragraph I. The fees collected under this subparagraph shall be paid into the dam maintenance fund established under RSA 482:55.
2 Annual Registration Fee; Shoreline. Amend RSA 482:8-a to read as follows:
482:8-a Annual Registration Fee.
…
II. On April 1, the department shall annually assess a fee of $1.58 per foot of linear shoreline upon all taxable waterfronts maintained by a state-owned dam. The moneys collected from such fee shall be deposited in the dam maintenance fund established in RSA 482:55 to be used for the operation, maintenance, and repair of state-owned dams.
Summary:
This bill funds state dam operation, maintenance, and repair through an annual assessment on properties maintained by state dams and a boater registration fee.
Potential Argument For:
This bill establishes a dedicated funding mechanism for critical dam maintenance, enhancing public safety and preserving vital infrastructure.
Argument Against:
This bill ensures the continued safe operation of state-owned dams by providing a dedicated funding source for their essential maintenance and repair, protecting public safety and infrastructure.
Online Testimony
Currently, 3 people support and 23 people oppose the bill. 88% oppose of 26 people
Opposition
This bill is just another money grab against waterfront property owners. It is often said the waters of NH are PUBLIC PROPERTY. I DO NOT own the waters....the State of NH does. These are YOUR dams, NOT mine !! Therefore if you need the revenue, TAX THE ENTIRE PUBLIC, not just target the landowners. This bill totally discriminates against a narrow population while the dams impact the entire state. Please stop this NONSENSE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
—Frederick Van Magness, of Moultonborough
so let me get the straight to see if I can sum up what this bill is: Bill is to raise boat fees another $5, and $1.58 per foot of waterfront on bodies of water that are dammed. and this money generated will go to maintenance of the dams, but the dams are 1 - Leased out by the state to private companies because they make money off the electricity that is produced from the dams by selling it to users in the state. 2- the leases include that these private companies have with the state has in them that the company is responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the dams
This bill should not become law. (1) It is unfair to target only waterfront landowners and boaters to maintain and repair dams. (2) The beneficiaries of maintaining these dams are really the general public in terms of taxes that come in for tourism through rooms and meals/liquor sales etc. (3) Maintenance money should be appropriated from the general fund not a fee added to a boat registration statute???
—George Plummer, of Londonderry
New Hampshire state boat registrations already faced an increase in 2025 thanks to the “need a second sticker / government redundancy” fee. The last thing this state needs is to alienate recreation even further with another $5 increase. With all due respect; someone should put in the hard work to figure out how the dam maintenance can be funded without just adding more fees.
The lake is open for the public to use. People with shoreline should not be funding the care of the state dams. We are already taxed for our property with shoreline factored in. I am strongly opposed to this bill.
—Nancy Williams, of Tuftonborough
HB629, taxing shorefront landowners, will add to already cumbersome property tax burdens for many. We, and many of our neighbors, have had camps for several generations. Not a lot of money in these families, but a lot of self-help and hard work. Now, to pay the taxes, succeeding generations all pitch in, so several average families share the burden. No rich folks here.
—Hon. Chris Christensen, of Merrimack
Money Grab, Just another way to add to the "view Tax" for owing property n the Lake. It discriminates against people who have lake front propery. All of the residents in NH enjoy what the lake have to offer, the state owns the water and control it. If money is needed EVERYONE should be taxed, crazy to single out lakefront property owners who already pay more for their property.
My family and I own lake front on Lake Winnipesaukee and have been involved in real estate evaluation for over 30 years. I find this bill unfair to water front property owners who are already taxed for the value of their water front. Many water front owners are second home owners and do not use many of the services their taxes pay for. We may own lake front but we do not own the lake.
—Ann Norman-Sydow, of Alton Bay
I own a home on the shorefront of Lake Winnipesaukee and have been told by a representative of Maine Patrol that the State of New Hampshire owns the water in all New Hampshire lakes. So if the State is trying to raise revenue, it should tax the entire public, not just the waterfront property owners, as the dams affect the entire state.
—Levon Kasarjian Jr, of Moultonborough
As a waterfront homeowner I write to oppose HB 629 as presented. I recognize the need for the state to fund maintenance of dams but I oppose the idea that the cost for this maintenance should be funded solely by waterfront owners on the lake within NH. First, as I have been so often told by authorities, the waters of these lakes are the property of the State, not the waterfornt property owners. The lakes created by these dams benefit all of the peoples of the state.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:30 p.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 644-FN
AN ACT relative to flying drones in state parks.
8 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Lisa Post (R), Rep. Keith Ammon (R), Rep. Jason Osborne (R), Rep. Jess Edwards (R), Rep. Paul Terry (R), Rep. Ross Berry (R), Rep. Sandra Panek (R), Rep. Jeffrey Tenczar (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; State Park System; Use of Drones in State Parks. Amend RSA 216-A by inserting after section 2 the following new section:
216-A:2-a Use of Drones in State Parks. A drone or small unmanned aircraft shall be permitted to operate in a state park, provided the operator is a person who possesses either a Federal Aviation Administration 14 C.F.R. Part 107 certificate or has passed the Recreational UAS Safety Test (TRUST).
I. The operator shall be permitted to launch and land small unmanned aircraft in state parks for commercial purposes as permitted under 14 C.F.R. part 107 and for recreational purposes as permitted under 49 U.S.C. section 44809, as amended, with the following exceptions where operation shall not be permitted:
(a) If the manner of flight intentionally interferes with the reasonable use and enjoyment of the park by other park users.
(b) Within the bounds of Cannon Mountain ski area during operating hours of ski season.
(c) Within the bounds of Flume Gorge during May through October (inclusive).
II. The commissioner may waive any exceptions in paragraph I for good cause.
III. A person who launches a small unmanned aircraft governed by this section shall be fully liable for injury or property damage negligently caused by their small unmanned aircraft.
IV. A person shall be responsible for the retrieval of their small unmanned aircraft which has launched from outside the state park and has landed in a state park. If the small unmanned aircraft system lands in an inaccessible location, the pilot shall notify a park official and may be assessed a retrieval fee of not more than $100, as established in rules of the department.
V. No person shall use a small unmanned aircraft system with the intent to conduct video surveillance of private citizens in state parks without prior written consent of the persons being surveilled.
VI. Notwithstanding the provisions of RSA 216-A:3-g, persons operating the small unmanned aircraft for commercial purposes under 14 C.F.R. Part 107 may be assessed a fee by the department of natural and cultural affairs for each day of flight, not to exceed $25 per day and payable after the flight if immediate payment options are not made available by the commissioner. The commissioner shall adopt rules under RSA 541-A only for the assessment and payment of fees for operators of small unmanned aircraft for commercial purposes.
VII. Any person who violates the provisions of this section may be fined by the commissioner a sum not to exceed $300, provided that a person who fails to retrieve a landed small unmanned aircraft may be fined not more than $100. Fines collected shall be credited to the state park fund.
Summary:
This bill permits drone operation in New Hampshire state parks for commercial and recreational purposes, subject to exceptions and limitations, including fees and fines for violations.
Argument For:
This bill responsibly allows drone use in state parks, balancing access with regulations, promoting recreation, and generating revenue through fees while safeguarding against misuse.
Argument Against:
This bill responsibly allows drone use in state parks, balancing access with regulations, promoting recreation, and generating revenue through fees while safeguarding against misuse.
Online Testimony
Currently, 9 people support and 5 people oppose the bill. 64% support of 14 people
Support
I strongly support HB644. A blanket prohibition of drones in NH State Parks was a knee-jerk reaction that is the wrong solution for public use lands. I am an FAA Certified Part 107 drone pilot and I have turned down jobs because of the current prohibition. Creating a responsible framework for non-recreational drone use in state parks is the sensible thing to do. I am perfectly happy paying a fee for this privilege. Thank you.
—William Daugherty, of Plainfield
As a certified drone pilot, I support this bill because I understand the robust system of checks that one must perform in order to legally operate a drone commercially, and privately. Drones above a certain size must have transponders, they must have lights when it is nighttime, and there are many organisations that guide pilots about the proper etiquette of drone usage, which I cannot list in detail to avoid running on. I'm saying all of this because I believe the drone community in New Hampshire is safe, responsible, and worthy of operating drones in our public parks. Thank you for listening to my testimony.
—Johnathan Molony, of Hooksett
I am writing to express my strong support for HB 644, which would allow responsible drone use in New Hampshire State Parks. Permitting drone launches at State Parks with reasonable safe guards encourages families, students and hobby enthusiasts to explore our natural resources in meaningful ways. This bill provides a balance between access and regulation, ensuring compliance with federal rules while promoting outdoor recreation in meaningful ways in New Hampshire.
I am writing to express my support for HB 644, which permits responsible drone use in New Hampshire state parks. This bill offers a chance to inspire future innovators and enhance appreciation for our natural surroundings. Drones can facilitate STEM education and promote responsibility and environmental awareness. Allowing drone activities in state parks with reasonable guidelines enables families, students, and hobbyists to engage with our public lands in new ways. The bill effectively balances access and regulation, adhering to federal rules while supporting New Hampshire's values of innovation and outdoor recreation. I encourage your support for HB 644 to preserve these opportunities for our communities.
Opposition
For the safety of trail users, horses and other animals. Amend to include: Operation of drones shall not be permitted: On trails for recreational use and to not to fly any lower than 100ft and within 100ft of a trail corridor. Exceptions are when permission is given by management for trail surveillance to access the trail condition and map trail, trail should be signed during the time the permitted activity is being done on the specific trail section. Exceptions is when permission is given by management for rescue operations.
This allows dangerous and reckless flying drones to harass and stress wildlife in state parks under the masquerade of control.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 2:00 p.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 657-FN
AN ACT relative to short-notice booking access for New Hampshire residents to state parks.
1 sponsor, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. John Sellers (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Expansion of State Park System; Intent. Amend RSA 216-A:1, II to read as follows:
II. To continually provide such additional park areas, [and] facilities, and booking and reservation systems, as may be necessary to meet the recreational needs of the citizens of all regions of the state.
2 New Paragraph; Reservation System for Local Residents. Amend RSA 216-A:2 by inserting after paragraph VIII the following new paragraph:
IX. The director shall develop and implement a reservation system for state parks that prioritizes access for local New Hampshire residents for day-use reservations, ensuring that a portion of day-use spaces are reserved for local residents. The system shall:
(a) Allow local residents, defined as New Hampshire residents aged 18 or older living within a town connecting to the park or within a town that falls entirely or partially within a 5-mile radius of the park, to book day-use reservations up to and including the day of park entry;
(b) Reserve a percentage of day-use spaces or a set number of day-use spaces specifically for local residents, ensuring fair and prioritized access; and
(c) Apply to state parks offering walking, hiking, biking trails, beaches, and picnic areas, excluding parks primarily providing overnight accommodations or camping facilities.
3 New Section; Local Resident Day-Use Reservation System. Amend RSA 216-A by inserting after section3- o the following new section:
216-A:3-p Local Resident Day-Use Reservation System.
…
II.(a) The department of natural and cultural resources shall implement and maintain a reservation system that allows local residents to book day-use reservations up to and including the day of park entry.
(b) The reservation system shall reserve a percentage of day-use spaces or a set number of day-use spaces specifically for local residents, similar to the allocation of handicapped parking spaces at commercial establishments.
(c) Reserved day-use spaces shall be made available to local residents on a first-come, first-served basis.
III. This section applies to state parks that offer walking, hiking, or biking trails, beaches, and picnic areas. It does not apply to parks that primarily provide overnight accommodations or camping facilities.
IV.(a) The department of natural and cultural resources shall adopt rules, pursuant to RSA 541-A, to implement and enforce the provisions of this section.
(b) The department shall conduct periodic reviews to ensure compliance with the requirements under this section and make adjustments as necessary.
Summary:
This bill requires the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources to create a short-notice reservation system for New Hampshire residents living near state parks, prioritizing their access to day-use areas.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures that New Hampshire residents living near state parks have prioritized access to those parks, increasing recreational opportunities for local communities.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could limit access to state parks for non-residents and create additional administrative burdens for the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources.
Online Testimony
Currently, 1 people support and 1 people oppose the bill. 50% support of 2 people
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 2:30 p.m. in Room 305 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
House Ways And Means
HB 650-FN
AN ACT removing references to repealed funds and relative to state park and robotics education funds.
5 sponsors, Lean Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Dan McGuire (R), Rep. Kenneth Weyler (R), Rep. Susan Almy (D), Rep. John Janigian (R), Sen. James Gray (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Cannon Mountain Ski Account Fund Established. Amend RSA 216-A by inserting after section 3-o the following new section:
216-A:3-p Cannon Mountain Ski Account Fund Established.
I. The state treasurer shall establish a separate and distinct account to be known as the Cannon Mountain ski account fund. The account shall be continuing and nonlapsing. The treasurer shall deposit in the Cannon Mountain ski account fund actual revenues associated with the state-owned ski areas, derived by the department of natural and cultural resources from fees, services, accommodations, rentals, revenue from lift and tramway operations, retail sales, and net profit from concession operations in excess of budget expenses. Any federal moneys which become available and all donations and gifts shall be deposited into this account.
…
3 Robotics Education Development Program and Robotics Education Fund; Robotics Education Fund Established; Cap on Unencumbered Balance. Amend RSA 188-E:24 to read as follows:
188-E:24 Robotics Education Fund Established. There is established in the office of the state treasurer a [nonlapsing] fund to be known as the robotics education fund which shall be kept distinct and separate from all other funds. The unencumbered balance of the fund shall be capped at $1,000,000, and any excess funds shall lapse to the general fund at the end of each biennium. The fund shall be administered by the commissioner of the department of education. The commissioner may accept and expend funds from any public or private source, including private gifts, grants, and donations.
4 Expansion of State Park System; State Park Fund Established; References Removed. Amend RSA 216-A:3-i, I to read as follows:
I. The state treasurer shall establish a separate and distinct account to be known as the state park fund. [The treasurer shall establish within the state park fund separate and distinct accounts, known as the state park account and the state-owned ski area account.] The [accounts] account shall be continuing and nonlapsing. The treasurer shall deposit in the state park account actual revenues from fees, services, accommodations, rentals, retail sales, net profit from concession operations, and special registration plate symbol fees collected under RSA 261:75-c in excess of budget expenses and [excluding] exclude revenues associated with state-owned ski areas. [The treasurer shall deposit in the state-owned ski area account actual revenues associated with the state-owned ski areas, derived by the department of natural and cultural resources from fees, services, accommodations, rentals, revenue from lift and tramway operations, retail sales, and net profit from concession operations in excess of budget expenses.] Any federal moneys which become available and all donations and gifts shall be deposited into [their appropriately designated accounts] this account.
5 Repeal. The following are repealed:
I. RSA 6:12, I(b)(32), relative to fees collected under RSA 310-B:21.
II. RSA 6:12, I(b)(341), relative to the advanced manufacturing education fund under RSA 188-E:23-a.
Summary:
This bill removes references to repealed funds, splits the state parks fund into two separate funds, and changes the robotics education fund to lapse excess funds into the general fund.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves state financial management by streamlining funds and ensuring responsible use of taxpayer money.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could hinder the growth of the robotics education program and limit funding for state parks by redirecting excess funds.
Online Testimony
Currently, 2 people support and 3 people oppose the bill. 60% oppose of 5 people
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 203 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 585
AN ACT relative to the property tax exemption for religious organizations.
4 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. John Janigian (R), Rep. Kenneth Weyler (R), Rep. Mark Pearson (R), Sen. Daryl Abbas (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Taxation; Persons and Property Liable to Taxation; Real Estate and Personal Property Tax Exemption. Amend RSA 72:23 to read as follows:
…
(b) A religious organization that rents not more than one church parsonage or similar residential real estate, and/or not more than one worship building shall be exempt from taxation on those properties provided that the rental income, if any, is used for the religious leader’s compensation, for the maintenance of the worship building or parsonage, or the funding of standard religious programs. In this subparagraph, "religious organization" means a single house of worship, including but not limited to churches, synagogues, mosques, shrines, and temples. An organization shall not claim more than one exemption under this subparagraph.
2 Applicability. This act shall apply to all taxable periods ending after December 31, 2024.
Summary:
This bill amends RSA 72:23 to grant real estate property tax exemptions to religious organizations for rental properties, provided the rental income is used for religious leader compensation, building maintenance, or religious programs, with a limit of one parsonage and one worship building.
Potential Argument For:
This bill allows religious organizations to better support their religious missions by reducing their property tax burden.
Argument Against:
This bill supports religious organizations by providing property tax exemptions for rental properties used for religious purposes, ensuring these organizations can focus on their mission rather than administrative costs. The exemption is limited to one parsonage and worship building per organization to prevent abuse.
Online Testimony
Currently, 1 people support and 13 people oppose the bill. 93% oppose of 14 people
Opposition
Regardless of where the income goes or how much the income is, the income makes the church a business and therefore that portion should be subject to property and applicable business taxes.
I am writing to express my strong opposition to House Bill 585, which seeks to expand property tax exemptions to include rental properties owned by religious organizations. While I fully respect the role of religious institutions in our communities, this bill raises serious concerns about fairness, accountability, and the impact on local taxpayers. Property tax exemptions exist to support organizations that provide direct public benefits, such as religious services, educational programs, and charitable activities. However, renting property is a commercial activity, regardless of how the income is used.
—Charles Lockwood, of East Kingston
No tax-free housing for illegal aliens by religious organizations.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:30 a.m. in Room 203 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 688-FN-L
AN ACT authorizing municipalities to tax charitable gaming facilities based on their enterprise value.
4 sponsors, Lean Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Bill Ohm (R), Rep. John Cloutier (D), Rep. Susan Almy (D), Rep. Sanjeev Manohar (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Sections; Tax. Amend RSA 72 by inserting after section 1-d the following new sections:
72:1-e Enterprises Liable. On April 1, a tax amounting to 2 times the assessed property value of an enterprise, to be known as the "enterprise tax," shall be assessed on every historic horse racing and charitable gaming facility, as governed by RSA 284, with 100 or more machines. Any enterprise, unless otherwise exempted by this section, in the state after April 1 and prior to December 1 of any year shall be assessed the enterprise tax.
72:1-f Optional Collection of Enterprise Tax.
I. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any town or city by majority vote of the legislative body may elect not to assess, levy, and collect the enterprise tax pursuant to RSA 72:1-e. All municipalities which elect not to assess, levy, or collect said enterprise tax shall be exempt from all provisions of law relating to it.
II. The legislative body of any town or city may adopt the provisions of paragraph I by approving the following question: "Shall we adopt the provisions of RSA 72:1-f which authorize any town or city to elect not to assess, levy and collect an enterprise tax?" If a majority of those voting on the question vote "Yes", RSA 72:1-e shall not apply within the town or city on April 1 following the approval of the question. Any town or city may rescind the provisions of RSA 72:1-f in the same manner, except the word "adopt" shall be changed to "rescind" in the question.
Summary:
This bill establishes a charitable gaming facilities tax on enterprises with 100 or more machines, with the option for municipalities to opt out of collecting this tax via a local vote.
Argument For:
This bill allows municipalities to tax large charitable gaming facilities, ensuring these businesses contribute fairly to the communities where they operate and providing flexibility for municipalities to decide what's best for them.
Argument Against:
This bill allows municipalities to tax large charitable gaming facilities, ensuring these businesses contribute fairly to the communities where they operate and providing flexibility for municipalities to decide what's best for them.
Online Testimony
Currently, 4 people support and 20 people oppose the bill. 83% oppose of 24 people
Support
This bill represents a reasonable approach to ensuring that gaming facilities contribute fairly to the communities in which they operate. Charitable gaming facilities, particularly those with 100 or more machines, generate significant revenue while leveraging the charitable aspect of their operations to justify their presence. By allowing municipalities to impose an enterprise tax, HB 688 creates an opportunity to balance the scales, ensuring these businesses contribute more equitably to local infrastructure, services, and community needs.
—Charles Lockwood, of East Kingston
Furthermore, the optional nature of the tax respects local autonomy, giving municipalities the flexibility to decide what is best for their communities. This is a practical approach that allows towns and cities to weigh the benefits and drawbacks based on their unique circumstances. While charitable gaming may provide some community benefits, it also carries social costs, including potential gambling addiction and financial hardship for vulnerable individuals.
—Charles Lockwood, of East Kingston
Opposition
I oppose passage of this bill which adversely limits the distribution of profits to charitable organizations.
This would be a terrible thing to do to the non-profits in NH and would have a significant impact on their ability to deliver services to those that are most in need. The lottery does not need this $$$ they are already very well self funded. It does not need to be used for political pork!
NH nonprofits save lives every day. Limiting their donations will not only cost tax payers more in the long-run, but it is inhumane to cut services to communities in need this severely. Casinos should have the freedom to donate however much they would like to any nonprofit they'd like as many times as they'd like.
The Samantha C. Smith Foundation was created to make something good out of a really bad situation after the passing of my daughter, Samantha in July 2004. With the generosity of charitable gaming with The Poker Room and now The Brook, Samantha’s Fund has been able to grant over $300,000 for Educational and Youth Hockey Scholarships. The only way we have been able to increase the scholarship funds has been from the proceeds from our casino partner The Brook. Please reject HB 531 and HB 688 which will greatly impact our fundraising with the Brook and will lessen our scholarship plans in the future.
—Kim Lanigan-Smith, of Auburn, Nh
I urge you to oppose eliminating the charitable gaming funding for non-profits in NH. This funding has allowed many charities, several of which I’m personally involved in, to do far more good works in our community. For example, I am on the board of the Hollis Brookline Dollars for Scholar’s charity, and we have been able to greatly expand our scholarship program due to the proceeds from charitable gaming. We went from typically 2-4 scholarships of $1000 each to 6-10 scholarships of $3000 - $5000 each, solely because of the revenue we received through the charitable gaming funding for non-profits.
I urge you to oppose eliminating the charitable gaming funding for non-profits in NH. This funding has allowed many charities, several of which I’m personally involved in, to do far more good works in our community. For example, I am on the board of the Hollis Brookline Dollars for Scholar’s charity, and we have been able to greatly expand our scholarship program due to the proceeds from charitable gaming. We went from typically 2-4 scholarships of $1000 each to 6-10 scholarships of $3000 - $5000 each solely because of the revenue we received through the charitable gaming funding for non-profits.
I urge you to not eliminate funding for NH non-profits. They account for 14% of the states workers and many are struggling with funding cuts and increased costs. Many non-profits are filling in where government is lacking, ie, making sure folks have enough to eat, or shelter, or can afford higher education. Please don't make that any harder than it already is.
I urge you to oppose eliminating the charitable gaming funding for non-profits in NH. This funding has allowed many charities, several of which I’m personally involved in, to do far more good works in our community. For example, I am on the board of the Hollis Brookline Dollars for Scholar’s charity, and we have been able to greatly expand our scholarship program due to the proceeds from charitable gaming. We went from typically 2-4 scholarships of $1000 each to 6-10 scholarships of $3000 - $5000 each solely because of the revenue we received through the charitable gaming funding for non-profits.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 11:00 a.m. in Room 203 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 737-L
AN ACT creating local options for games of chance.
8 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Bill Boyd (R), Rep. Thomas Schamberg (D), Rep. Len Turcotte (R), Rep. Jerry Stringham (D), Rep. Walter Spilsbury (R), Rep. David Paige (D), Rep. Joseph Barton (R), Sen. David Rochefort (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Local Option; Games of Chance. Amend RSA 287-D by inserting after section 287-D:31 the following new section:
287-D:32 Local Option; Games of Chance.
I. The lottery commission shall not grant a game operator employer license to operate games of chance in a municipality if that municipality has voted to prohibit games of chance to be held within its boundaries, or if there is a pending question on the municipality’s warrant or official ballot for the next regular municipal election. Such vote shall be held in the following manner:
(a) In a town, the question shall be placed on the warrant of an annual town meeting upon receipt of a petition signed by at least 25 registered voters. If a city, the question shall be placed on the official ballot for the next regular municipal election upon submission to the city clerk of a petition signed by at least 5 percent of registered voters.
(b) The selectmen, aldermen, or city council shall hold a public hearing on the question at least 15 days, but not more than 30 days before the question is to be voted on. Notice of the hearing shall be posted in at least 2 public places in the municipality, on the website of the municipality, and by publication in a newspaper of general circulation at least 14 days before the hearing.
(c) In municipalities where games of chance are not currently in operation, the wording of the question shall be substantially as follows: "Shall we prohibit the operation of games of chance within the town or city?"
(d) In municipalities where games of chance are currently operating, the wording of the question shall be substantially as follows: “Shall we prohibit additional brick and mortar games of chance operations within the town or city?"
II. If a majority of those voting on the question vote "Yes," games of chance may not be operated within the town or city.
Summary:
This bill allows municipalities to hold a vote to prohibit games of chance within their boundaries, with specific procedures for the vote, public hearings, and potential rescission of the prohibition, also allowing for exceptions for existing operators and the allowance of limited charitable gaming events.
Potential Argument For:
This bill empowers municipalities to make decisions about the types of businesses they want to operate within their borders, reflecting local preferences and priorities.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could negatively impact local economies by restricting revenue-generating businesses and limiting recreational options for residents.
Online Testimony
Currently, 7 people support and 1 people oppose the bill. 88% support of 8 people
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:00 p.m. in Room 203 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
HB 635-FN
AN ACT relative to taxing non-profit entities who settle illegal immigrants as for-profit entities.
1 sponsor, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Rep. Travis Corcoran (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Taxation; Business Enterprise Tax; Definitions. Amend RSA 77-E:1, III to read as follows:
III. … "Business enterprise" shall include any for-profit or nonprofit enterprise or organization, whether corporation, partnership, limited liability company, proprietorship, association, trust, foundation, business trust, real estate trust, or other form of organization engaged in, or attempting to engage in, settling or re-settling illegal immigrants, including such enterprises that are expressly made exempt from income taxation under section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.
(a) For the purposes of this paragraph, "settling" and "re-settling" shall include:
(1) Providing, or intending to provide, housing assistance, cash, vouchers, or other items of value to be used for housing, utilities, or other goods or services;
(2) Providing, or intending to provide, legal or procedural aid given to assist a person in achieving residency;
(3) Providing, or intending to provide, advice, assistance, or translation services used in applying for government benefits, transportation, or other goods or services.
(b) For the purposes of this paragraph, "illegal immigrant" means anyone who is known, or should be known, to be in the United States without legal right or permission, or in the United States without having entered through a legal port of entry, to achieve housing, services, residency, or family reunification.
2 New Paragraphs; Taxation; Business Enterprise Tax; Administration. Amend RSA 77-E:11 by inserting after paragraph IV the following new paragraphs:
V. The first person who reports business enterprises engaging in, or attempting to engage in, settling or resettling illegal immigrants to the department of revenue administration may be provided a bounty, at the sole discretion of the department, not to exceed 10 percent of the business enterprise tax, as provided in RSA 77-E:2, assessed against the business enterprise in the tax year of the report. A person shall be eligible for a bounty, at the discretion of the department, for each tax year a report is successfully filed.
VI. The commissioner of the department of revenue administration shall adopt rules, pursuant to RSA 541-A, governing the bounty program established in paragraph V.
Summary:
This bill amends the definition of "business enterprise" to include non-profit organizations that settle illegal immigrants, subjecting them to business taxes and offering bounties to those who report such activities.
Argument For:
This bill holds non-profit organizations accountable for engaging in illegal activity by taxing them as for-profit entities if they are settling illegal immigrants and provides a bounty system for reporting such actions, thus deterring illegal activity and recouping taxpayer money used for illegal purposes.
Argument Against:
This bill holds non-profit organizations accountable for engaging in illegal activity by taxing them as for-profit entities if they are settling illegal immigrants and provides a bounty system for reporting such actions, thus deterring illegal activity and recouping taxpayer money used for illegal purposes.
Online Testimony
Currently, 28 people support and 196 people oppose the bill. 88% oppose of 224 people
Support
Let it be known that I support this decrease in demand for housing so that the American citizens of New Hampshire may as ordained by it's constitution: "Therefore, all government of right originates from the people, is founded in consent, and instituted for the general good."
No tax exemption for non-profits sympathizing with illegal aliens.
I entirely object to my tax dollars being used to resettle illegal immigrants in New Hampshire, and I can't fathom why a non-profit engaged in facilitating this illegal act should enjoy any tax-exempt status.
I am strongly in support of this bill. Many non-profits in New Hampshire receive steady streams of taxpayer money through grants.. If a non-profit is engaging in illegal behavior which harms the legal residents of this state, then they should be taxed. This will at least recoup a portion of the taxpayer money they've used for illegal purposes.
I object to my tax dollars being used by "non-profit" entities to aid in the settlement and resettlement of illegal or undocumented migrants in New Hampshire communities. The United States has immigration laws that must be followed and respected. It is my understanding that the sponsoring representative has uncovered evidence that individuals managing various "non-profit" NGOs are personally profiting from their operations. This bill recognizes that these entities are "non-profit" in name only and would tax them accordingly.
—James Lovinsky, of Harrisville
Knowingly settling illegal aliens is an illegal act. How can New Hampshire grant tax-free status to people who knowingly and deliberately commit illegal acts?
—Curtis Howland, of Manchester
If non profits are not resettling folks who broke our laws, they shouldn’t be concerned with this bill. This bill further protects us, the taxpayer and citizen, from funds being used for criminal activities. We certainly need and support immigration, however, individuals and groups need to respect the laws of our country/ state first if one wants to be a productive citizen of our country.
I fully support HB635. I do not want non-profits supporting illegal immigration. If they want to use funds to provide services for illegal immigrants then they should be taxed.
I support this effort to tax NGO’s as for-profit when they are illegally attempting to resettle undocumented aliens into NH. I stand against illegal immigration, this has no place in New Hampshire. Thank you
—STEVEN E FRECHETTE, of Nashua
HB 635 is a vital bill for holding organizations accountable. Hiring illegals immigrants is a violation of federal law yet organizations working as “non-profits” are able to make millions of dollars bringing these people into our state. This pipeline needs to stop. Illegal immigrants cost our state and the taxpayer millions while these non-profits pay nothing. By taxing them, it discourages this action while adding revenue to the state from the very organizations that are adding tax drains into the system.
—Jonathan Leslie, of Deerfield
Opposition
Non-profits' mission is to protect and care for all. This bill encourages turning on our neighbor and that is not the country we are. Please oppose this bill.
The state has no business taxing nonprofit organizations. Period.
This proposal boggles the mind. It will affect many many people who came here LEGALLY and are playing by the rules. Why would you tax an NFP feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, smoothing the transition during the arduous journey to seek asylum, or get education, or add value to our communities, or feed their children while they wait and wait and wait for a green card, a hearing, and the opportunity to be heard for permanent status? Churches like the Quakers, advocates providing pro bono legal advice (which is =STRONGLY linked to compliance with our courts and laws)???
—Julie Zimmer, of Peterborough
I’m reaching out as a resident of Ward 10 in Manchester and someone who works in the nonprofit sector. I’m deeply concerned about House Bill 635-FN, which unfairly targets nonprofits that assist immigrants, and I strongly urge you to oppose this legislation. Beyond the legal and logistical problems, I worry that this bill is based on misconceptions about immigration and a lack of understanding of how complex the system is—misconceptions that lead to harmful policies rather than real solutions.
—Patricia Utley, of Manchester
As a New Hampshire resident, and a citizen of this country I whole heartedly urge you to OPPOSE this blatant disregard for humanity. This bill would be a gross overreach of power and immoral. This bill is reminiscent of Nazi Germany. Undocumented people cause no threat to us. Diversity is what makes things better and stronger. Please OPPOSE this bill.
Most NH citizens, myself included, owe our heritage, prosperity, and good fortune to immigrants. I am personally speaking of.my maternal grandparents who separately braved the long ocean journey from Sicily to seek a better life in the United States. They came as part of the waves of immigrants who entered our country at the beginning of the 20th Century. My grandfather came by himself, still a teenager, seeking opportunity. My grandmother told me she "turned six on the boat" tightly grasping her mother's had to join her father. I know they faced hard times and discrimination when society looked down on these olive skinned newcomers. But as a society we grew to know better and eventually these immigrants were recognized as the hardworking lovers of America they were and became part of our country's fabric. This bill seeks to penalize our neighbors who wish to welcome this century's newcomers.
Dear Committee Members, I write in opposition of HB635FN becasue it is unworkable, penalizes organizations whose job is to serve their community and not to serve as law enforcement officers, and it would potentially lead to the closure of organizations in our communities such as hospitals, food banks, and those that serve people with disabilities. This bill would penalize organizations based on the immigration status of the community members they serve. As a family doctor I have no way of verifying the immigration status of my patients and neither do organizations that serve vulnerable and low-income members of our community.
—Phenton Harker, of Manchester
am writing to express my strong opposition to House Bill 635-FN. This bill is not just bad policy—it is fundamentally inhumane. It seeks to penalize nonprofit organizations for doing what they exist to do: provide help to people in need. Worse, it promotes a bounty system that actively encourages citizens to turn against each other in the name of ideological policing. This is not the kind of governance New Hampshire should stand for.
—Charles Lockwood, of East Kingston
HB635 uses a broad and potentially harmful definition of "illegal immigrant," which could lead to confusion or overly strict interpretations. This may result in nonprofits that assist immigrants being labeled as engaging in "illegal" activities, subjecting them to scrutiny and penalties. The right to due process is a legal principle that guarantees fair treatment for all people in the United States, including undocumented immigrants. This right is outlined in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Further, individuals in removal proceedings have the right to counsel (at no expense to the Government) under 8 USC §1362. Therefore HB635 could infringe upon the federal rights of undocumented immigrants.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 2:00 p.m. in Room 203 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
Senate Executive Departments And Administration
SB 178
AN ACT relative to the department of health and human services laboratory services for testing of water supplies.
1 sponsor, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. James Gray (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Department of Health and Human Services; Laboratory Services; Reimbursements; Rulemaking. RSA 131:4 is repealed and reenacted to read as follows:
131:4 Laboratory Services, Fees, and Rulemaking; Lab Equipment and Replacement Fund Established.
I. The commissioner of the department of health and human services shall adopt rules pursuant to RSA 541-A relative to a list of laboratory services to be provided under this chapter and a schedule of fees for such services. The fees may be waived by the commissioner when the commissioner determines it is in the best interests of the health of the public to do so.
II. Fees for analyses required by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act or offered as a service shall be set by following the cost allocation method established for reimbursements to the state from grants funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
III. All such fees collected by the commissioner of the department of health and human services from federal or state grants or from other state agencies shall be credited against the operating costs of the laboratory. Fees collected from public or private clients shall be deposited in the general fund, with the exception that 50 percent of every analysis fee shall be deposited in the lab equipment and replacement fund, a special nonlapsing fund established in the state treasury and kept separate and distinct from all other funds. The fund shall be continually appropriated to the commissioner of the department of health and human services for the purchase or replacement of laboratory equipment designed to improve service. The commissioner may, with prior approval of the governor and council, use funds in the lab equipment and replacement fund for unanticipated personnel or supply expenditures made necessary by unexpected changes in or additions to federal or state required laboratory analyses or unusual volume of samples.
…
5 Repeal. RSA 131:3-a, relative to testing of water supplies and fees required, is repealed.
Summary:
This bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to adopt rules regarding laboratory services and fees for water testing, transferring fee setting from statute to administrative rule.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves the efficiency and flexibility of setting fees for water testing services by allowing the Department of Health and Human Services to adjust fees through administrative rules rather than legislation.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lead to unpredictable and potentially excessive fee increases for water testing services due to the lack of legislative oversight involved in rulemaking.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 179-FN
AN ACT to administratively attach the state council on housing stability to the department of health and human services.
1 sponsor, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. James Gray (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 State Council on Housing Stability. Amend RSA 4-H:1 to read as follows:
4-H:1 State Council on Housing Stability Established. There is hereby established the state council on housing stability for the purpose of implementing the plan to create housing stability for all citizens of the state of New Hampshire. The council shall be administratively attached to the department of health and human services as defined in RSA 21-G:5.
Summary:
This bill administratively attaches the state council on housing stability to the department of health and human services.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves efficiency and coordination by placing the state council on housing stability under the department of health and human services.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may create unnecessary bureaucratic entanglement by placing the state council on housing stability under the department of health and human services.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:15 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 180-FN
AN ACT designating Coos county as a distressed place-based economy.
6 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. David Rochefort (R), Rep. James Tierney (R), Rep. Arnold Davis (R), Rep. Mike Ouellet (R), Rep. Seth King (R), Rep. Sean Durkin (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
2 New Chapter; Coos County Established as Distressed Place-Based Economy. Amend RSA by inserting after chapter 162-T the following new chapter:
CHAPTER 162-U
COOS COUNTY ESTABLISHED AS DISTRESSED PLACE-BASED ECONOMY
…
162:U:2 Regulatory Principle for Department Commissioners. Commissioners of state departments shall include county government input for any Coos County decisions impacting its place-based economy. Collaborative regulatory approaches with existing regional economic objectives shall minimize unintended economic impacts. To protect the health, safety, and economic welfare of Coos' interdependent place-based economy, agencies shall seek to achieve statutory goals as effectively and efficiently as possible without imposing unnecessary burdens on local governments. Failure to recognize differences in the scale and resources of these entities adversely affects competition in the marketplace, discourages innovation, and restricts productivity improvements to the economic landscape.
162:U:3 Reporting. To achieve principle established under this chapter, commissioners shall only issue regulatory decisions in Coos County once interdependent economies and/or economic development plans are analyzed and, if unavoidable, shall report with justification and basis for such decision, and mitigate any such opposing actions that would inherently damage Coos' place-based economy with its decision. Commissioners shall ensure that such decisions are not incompatible with decisions of other departments.
Summary:
This bill designates Coos County as a distressed place-based economy and mandates that state agency commissioners consult with county commissioners before making regulatory decisions affecting the county.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will improve economic conditions in Coos County by ensuring state agencies consider the county's unique circumstances when making regulations.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could create unnecessary delays and increase costs for state agencies by requiring consultations with Coos County commissioners on all relevant regulatory decisions.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 181-FN
AN ACT relative to workers' compensation for firefighters with cancer.
9 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Rep. Alexis Simpson (D), Rep. Laura Telerski (D), Rep. Matthew Wilhelm (D), Rep. Stephen Pearson (R), Rep. Nicholas Bridle (R), Sen. Regina Birdsell (R), Sen. Suzanne Prentiss (D), Sen. Tara Reardon (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Workers' Compensation; Firefighter and Heart, Lung, or Cancer Disease. Amend RSA 281-A:17 to read as follows:
281-A:17 Firefighter and Heart, Lung, or Cancer Disease.
…
II. Notwithstanding the provisions of RSA 281-A:2, XI and XIII, 16 and 27, there shall exist a prima facie presumption that cancer disease in a firefighter, whether a regular, call, volunteer, or retired member of a fire department, is occupationally caused, unless clear and convincing evidence is provided which proves that the cancer disease is not occupationally related. However:
(a) A firefighter who has been a firefighter for 10 years shall have the benefit of this prima facie presumption as follows:
(1) If a fire department follows the medical examination as outlined by the National Fire Protection Association standard 1582, the firefighter shall provide this report as evidence that the firefighter was free of such disease at the beginning of his or her employment and shall guarantee that he or she has lived a tobacco free lifestyle. The employer of a firefighter shall provide the required reasonable medical evidence to the workers' compensation carrier and to the firefighter to present as part of his or her claim. If the employer fails to do so, the firefighter shall have the benefit of the prima facie presumption regardless of the absence of the reasonable medical evidence.
(2) …
…
(c) [No active or retired firefighter shall receive the presumption benefit unless the employer voluntarily has in effect a policy that follows the fire standards and training commission curriculum requirement for best practices for use and cleaning of equipment.
…
(e) Firefighters covered under this section shall have their claims paid within 21 days of notice to the carrier and claims shall continue to be paid until such time that clear and convincing evidence is provided to prove that the cancer disease is not occupationally related.
Summary:
This bill extends the presumption that heart or lung disease is occupationally related for firefighters to include cancer, unless clear and convincing evidence proves otherwise, and requires workers' compensation benefits to be paid within 21 days.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures firefighters suffering from occupational illnesses receive timely compensation for their work-related health issues.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could significantly increase costs for workers' compensation programs and potentially lead to higher taxes or reduced services.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:45 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 187-FN
AN ACT adopting the dentist and dental hygienist compact.
7 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Tara Reardon (D), Rep. Sheila Seidel (R), Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
SECTION 3. STATE PARTICIPATION IN THE COMPACT
A. In order to join the compact and thereafter continue as a participating state, a state must:
1. Enact a compact that is not materially different from the model compact as determined in accordance with commission rules;
2. Participate fully in the commission’s data system;
3. Have a mechanism in place for receiving and investigating complaints about its licensees and license applicants;
4. Notify the commission, in compliance with the terms of the compact and commission rules, of any adverse action or the availability of significant investigative information regarding a licensee and license applicant;
5. Fully implement a criminal background check requirement, within a time frame established by commission rule, by receiving the results of a qualifying criminal background check;
6. Comply with the commission rules applicable to a participating state;
7. Accept the national board examinations of the joint commission on national dental examinations or another examination accepted by commission rule as a licensure examination;
8. Accept for licensure that applicants for a dentist license graduate from a predoctoral dental education program accredited by the commission on dental accreditation, or another accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education for the accreditation of dentistry and dental hygiene education programs, leading to the doctor of dental surgery (D.D.S.) or doctor of dental medicine (D.M.D.) degree;
9. Accept for licensure that applicants for a dental hygienist license graduate from a dental hygiene education program accredited by the commission on dental accreditation or another accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education for the accreditation of dentistry and dental hygiene education programs;
10. Require for licensure that applicants successfully complete a clinical assessment;
11. Have continuing professional development requirements as a condition for license renewal; and
12. Pay a participation fee to the commission as established by commission rule.
B. Providing alternative pathways for an individual to obtain an unrestricted license does not disqualify a state from participating in the compact.
C. When conducting a criminal background check the state licensing authority shall:
1. Consider that information in making a licensure decision;
2. Maintain documentation of completion of the criminal background check and background check information to the extent allowed by state and federal law; and
3. Report to the commission whether it has completed the criminal background check and whether the individual was granted or denied a license.
D. A licensee of a participating state who has a qualifying license in that state and does not hold an encumbered license in any other participating state, shall be issued a compact privilege in a remote state in accordance with the terms of the compact and commission rules. If a remote state has a jurisprudence requirement a compact privilege will not be issued to the licensee unless the licensee has satisfied the jurisprudence requirement.
Summary:
This bill adopts the Dentist and Dental Hygienist Compact, allowing licensed dentists and dental hygienists in participating states to practice in other participating states without obtaining additional licenses.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves access to dental care by streamlining the interstate licensure process for dentists and dental hygienists.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may increase operational costs for the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification due to a potential increase in license applications.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 185-FN
AN ACT relative to office of professional licensure and certification investigations.
16 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Rep. Carol McGuire (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Rep. Jaci Grote (D), Rep. Jose Cambrils (R), Rep. Alvin See (R), Sen. David Watters (D), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Sen. Denise Ricciardi (R), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Sen. Keith Murphy (R), Sen. David Rochefort (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R), Sen. Tara Reardon (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Office of Professional Licensure and Certification; Complaints and Investigations. Amend RSA 310:9, II through III to read as follows:
II. Upon receipt of an allegation of professional misconduct, within 30 days, the office shall determine whether the allegation states a claim of professional misconduct on its face.
(a) If the office determines that the allegation does not state a claim, it shall make a recommendation to the board at its next regularly scheduled meeting for dismissal. The board shall review the office's recommendation and dismiss the allegation if it agrees with the office's recommendation. Each board shall dismiss a complaint if the board concludes that the allegations do not state a claim of professional misconduct.
(b) If the office determines that the allegation does state a claim on its face, the office shall proceed under paragraph III.
III. … The office shall have 60 days to complete the investigation and report to the board at its next regularly scheduled meeting. If the investigation is incomplete, the board at its own discretion may either instruct the office to continue with its investigation or make a final determination on the claim within 60 days of receipt.
Summary:
This bill amends RSA 310:9, II and III, to require the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification to determine within 30 days if an allegation states a claim of professional misconduct, and to complete investigations within 60 days, reporting to the board at its next regularly scheduled meeting.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures timeliness and efficiency in handling professional misconduct allegations, protecting both licensees and the public.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill's mandated timeframes may be unrealistic and could compromise the thoroughness of investigations into professional misconduct allegations.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:15 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 188-FN
AN ACT allowing independent permitting and inspections, and allowing local governments to authorize licensed engineers and architects to perform building code inspections.
6 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Keith Murphy (R), Rep. Jason Osborne (R), Rep. Joe Alexander (R), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Short Title. This act shall be cited as the “Speeding Development Act”.
2 Purpose. The purpose of this act is to facilitate speedier and more efficient development while ensuring public safety by authorizing licensed or certified third parties to certify documents and inspect buildings in compliance with applicable building and other codes.
3 New Sections; Private Providers Established. Amend RSA 155-A:7 by inserting after section 7 the following new sections:
155-A:7-a Private Provider Services.
…
II. Property owners or developers may use private providers for building code inspections and plan reviews.
III. Private providers shall be licensed professionals, including engineers, architects, or building code administrators.
IV. Private providers shall adhere to all applicable codes and standards set forth by the state building code pursuant to RSA 155-A:2 and any local bylaws or ordinances established pursuant to RSA 155-A:3.
V. Private providers may use electronic signatures and transmission for submitting plans, reports, and other documents required for building code compliance.
VI. Local enforcement agencies appointed pursuant to RSA 674:51 or RSA 47:22 shall audit a percentage of inspections performed by private providers within their jurisdiction to ensure compliance with applicable codes. Audits shall be conducted randomly and without prior notice to the private provider. The local enforcement agency shall have the authority to take corrective action if any violations are found during the audit.
…
155-A:15 Allowance for Use of Independent Providers.
I. Notwithstanding any law, rule, or regulation, the fee owner of land or a building or structure, or the fee owner’s contractor upon written authorization from the fee owner, may contract with an independent provider to review development documents or provide building inspections with regard to such land, building, or structure, and may make payment directly to the independent provider for the provision of such services.
Summary:
This bill allows property owners to hire independent third-party inspectors to verify building code compliance, establishing private providers as an alternative to local enforcement agencies for inspections and plan reviews.
Potential Argument For:
This bill streamlines the development process by providing faster and more efficient building code inspections and plan reviews while maintaining public safety through audits of private providers.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may reduce local government revenue and increase costs by shifting inspection fees to private providers and increasing the workload for local agencies to review third-party work and conduct audits.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:30 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 194-FN
AN ACT relative to qualifications for cosmetologists and relative to membership on the
4 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. David Watters (D), Rep. Patricia Cornell (D), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Victoria Sullivan (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Qualifications; Cosmetologists. Amend RSA 313-A:11, I(c)(1) to read as follows:
(1) A minimum of [1,500] 1,200 hours of training in a school of cosmetology approved by the board; or
2 Barbering, Cosmetology, and Esthetics; Board; Member Added. Amend RSA 313-A:2, I to read as follows:
I. There shall be a board of barbering, cosmetology, and esthetics consisting of [7] 8 members as follows: one licensed barber, one licensed cosmetologist, one licensed esthetician, one licensed manicurist, one owner of a licensed barbering, cosmetology, esthetics, or manicuring school who shall be a resident of New Hampshire or a designee of such owner who shall be a licensee and a resident of New Hampshire, one owner of a registered tanning facility and one public member; each to be appointed by the governor with the consent of the council to a term of 5 years. There shall also be a member that is a representative of the regional career technical center, appointed by the commissioner of the department of education to a term of 5 years.
Summary:
This bill reduces the required training hours for cosmetology licenses from 1,500 to 1,200 and adds an eighth member to the board of barbering, cosmetology, and esthetics, representing regional career technical centers.
Potential Argument For:
This bill reduces the barrier to entry for aspiring cosmetologists, making the profession more accessible and potentially lowering costs for consumers.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lower the standards for cosmetology licensing, potentially compromising public safety and the quality of services provided.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:45 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 196-FN
AN ACT relative to the exemption from competitive bidding requirements for certain state agency projects.
7 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. David Watters (D), Rep. Steven Smith (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Rep. Charlie St. Clair (D), Sen. Regina Birdsell (R), Sen. Donovan Fenton (D), Sen. Howard Pearl (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Department of Administrative Services; Major Projects. Amend RSA 21-I:80, I(b) to read as follows:
(b) Projects for the department of fish and game, the [adjutant general's] department of military affairs and veterans services, and the department of natural and cultural resources, whose estimated total cost is not more than [$500,000] $1,000,000. The commissioner may grant other agencies an exclusion for specific projects whose estimated cost is not more than [$500,000] $1,000,000 if he or she concludes to do so is in the best interests of the state.
Summary:
This bill raises the threshold for projects exempt from competitive bidding requirements from $500,000 to $1,000,000 for certain state agencies, contingent upon the Department of Military Affairs and Veterans Services receiving funding for two additional positions.
Potential Argument For:
This bill increases efficiency and reduces bureaucracy by allowing certain agencies to manage smaller projects in-house, streamlining the process and potentially saving taxpayer money.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lead to decreased oversight and potentially higher costs for certain projects if not properly managed, and the contingency is not guaranteed.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 11:00 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 199-FN
AN ACT relative to establishing a new recruitment and retention program for new New Hampshire state troopers.
15 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. David Watters (D), Rep. Linda Harriott-Gathright (D), Rep. Mark Proulx (R), Rep. David Meuse (D), Rep. Jennifer Rhodes (R), Sen. Kevin Avard (R), Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Sen. Denise Ricciardi (R), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Sen. Donovan Fenton (D), Sen. Debra Altschiller (D), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R), Sen. Pat Long (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Recruitment and Retention Program. Amend RSA 21-P by inserting after section 21-P:4 the following new section:
21-P:4-a Recruitment and Retention Program.
I. The department is authorized to develop a recruitment and retention incentive program, as well as request that the joint fiscal committee transfer funds from the highway fund or other available funds for recruitment, selection, placement, and retention of qualified applicants. The program may include expenditures for recruitment and retention incentives including but not limited to:
(a) ?Bonuses for newly hired applicants who have not been employed by the state for a period of time to be determined by the commissioner, but no less than one year, immediately preceding the date of hire; and
…
V. Any requested expenditure for recruitment, retention incentives, or bonuses shall require the approval of the joint fiscal committee of the general court.
2 Appropriation; Department of Safety.
The sum of $900,000 for the biennium ending June 30, 2027 is appropriated to the department of safety for the purpose of funding recruitment incentives in accordance with RSA 21-P:4-a. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sum out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Summary:
This bill establishes a recruitment and retention incentive program for New Hampshire state troopers, authorizing the use of funds from the highway fund or other sources for bonuses, referral fees, and recruitment efforts, contingent upon approval from the joint fiscal committee.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will improve recruitment and retention of state troopers by offering competitive incentives, thus enhancing public safety in New Hampshire.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may be fiscally irresponsible by committing significant funds to incentives without a guarantee of sufficient returns in the form of new recruits or improved retention.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 11:15 a.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 201-FN
AN ACT relative to classified and unclassified positions.
1 sponsor, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Daniel Innis (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Conversion to Classified Exempt Salary Positions. Amend RSA 99 by inserting after section 9 the following new section:
99:9-a Conversion to Classified Exempt Salary Positions.
I. The department of administrative services, through its division of personnel, is authorized to convert unclassified positions or qualifying classified positions to classified exempt salary positions.
(a) This conversion applies to positions that meet the requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the definition of exempt salary under the personnel rules.
(b) All conversions shall be voluntary for the employees or occur when an employee leaves and the position is not filled.
(c) The converted position shall be placed at the nearest pay rate and step equivalent to their previous unclassified position to ensure employees do not experience a reduction in pay.
II. The appointing authority at each executive department and executive agency may request that the director of personnel convert any unclassified position that serves at the pleasure of that appointing authority or any qualifying classified position to an exempt salary position in the classified system.
(a) Upon receipt of a request under paragraph II, the director of personnel shall convert an unclassified position to an exempt salary position, if it meets FLSA requirements and the definition of exempt salary.
(b) Any unclassified position converted to an exempt salary position under paragraph II shall be placed in the appropriate standard occupational classification group based on its duties and responsibilities.
(c) Any incumbent in a converted position shall be placed at the step with a pay rate closest to the pay rate of the step they were at in the unclassified position, ensuring no reduction in pay.
2 Expansion of Rulemaking Authority. Amend RSA 21-I:14, XVIII(c) through (d) to read as follows:
(c) Transfers between positions within the executive branch and across branches of state government; [and]
(d) Termination and payouts upon termination of employment[.];
(e) Unpaid medical leave; and
(f) Employee discipline.
3 Medical and Surgical Benefits. RSA 21-I:30, I is repealed and reenacted to read as follows:
I. The state shall pay a partial premium for health care coverage for its employees and eligible family members, reflecting the premium contributions paid by employees as per collective bargaining agreements.
4 New Paragraphs; Salaries Established. Amend RSA 94:1-a by inserting after paragraph V the following new paragraph:
VI. The commissioner of the department of administrative services is authorized to establish a temporary salary grade and step for an employee in a newly legislatively authorized unclassified position. This temporary classification remains in effect until the final position classification ranking by the state's contractor is determined and approved by the joint committee on employment compensation (JCEC).
Summary:
This bill authorizes the conversion of certain state positions to classified exempt salary positions, expands the commissioner of the department of administrative services' rulemaking authority, amends the state health care premium payment structure, and allows temporary salary classifications for new unclassified positions.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves the efficiency and flexibility of state government by allowing for the conversion of positions to classified exempt salary positions and expanding rulemaking authority.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lead to increased costs and complexities in managing state employees and could potentially reduce employee protections.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:00 p.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 286-FN
AN ACT creating the New Hampshire office of film and creative media.
4 sponsors, Lean Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Rep. Jodi Nelson (R), Rep. Charles Foote (R), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Department of Business and Economic Affairs; Office of Film and Creative Media. Amend RSA 12-O by inserting after section 76 the following new section:
12-O:77 Office of Film and Creative Media.
I. There is established the office of film and creative media within the department of business and economic affairs. The office shall be under the supervision of a classified director of the office of film and creative media, who shall serve under the supervision of the commissioner. The director shall provide administrative oversight and ensure that the responsibilities of the office described in this section are fulfilled.
II. The office of film and creative media shall:
(a) Connect film and media industry organizations within New Hampshire.
(b) Act as a point of contact for production companies considering film and media production in New Hampshire.
(c) Provide information on tax incentives and tax programs to media companies who may wish to do business in New Hampshire.
(d) Maintain a database of New Hampshire film and media professionals, film crews, venues, and filming locations.
(e) Maintain a database of employment and internship opportunities in the film and creative media industry within New Hampshire.
(f) Encourage out of state production and media companies to film projects within New Hampshire.
(g) Highlight New Hampshire's business climate to the film and media industry.
…
3 Department of Business and Economic Affairs; New Positions; Appropriation.
I. The sum of $500,000 for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2026 and June 30, 2027 is hereby appropriated to the department of business and economic affairs, for the purpose of managing and promoting filmmaking in New Hampshire. All funds appropriated for the program shall be nonlapsing. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Summary:
This bill establishes an Office of Film and Creative Media within the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, creates film and motion picture tax credits for qualifying companies, and appropriates funds to support the new office.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will stimulate economic growth in New Hampshire by attracting film and media productions, creating jobs, and boosting related industries.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may create significant, indeterminable financial burdens on the state without guaranteeing a sufficient return on investment from the film industry.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:15 p.m. in Room 103 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
Senate Health And Human Services
SB 132-FN
AN ACT relative to health insurance coverage for prosthetics.
14 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Rep. Kenneth Weyler (R), Rep. Kimberly Rice (R), Rep. Alexis Simpson (D), Sen. David Watters (D), Sen. Ruth Ward (R), Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Sen. Suzanne Prentiss (D), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Donovan Fenton (D), Sen. Debra Altschiller (D), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R), Sen. Pat Long (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Accident and Health Insurance; Coverage for Prosthetic Devices. Amend RSA 415:18-ff to read as follows:
415:18-ff Coverage for Prosthetic Devices [for Children].
Each insurer that issues or renews a policy of group or blanket accident or health insurance providing benefits for medical or hospital expenses shall provide coverage for prosthetic devices, including activity-specific prosthetic devices, for [children under 19 years of age,] individuals who are residents of this state and covered by such insurance. The insurer may limit coverage for activity-specific prosthetic devices to one activity-specific prosthetic device per plan year. Medically necessary prosthetic devices shall not be subject to any annual limits. Coverage under this section shall be subject to such other terms and conditions of the policy that may apply.
I. Covered benefits shall include:
(a) All materials and components necessary to use the device;
(b) Instruction to the enrollee on using the device; and
(c) The repair or replacement of a prosthetic device that is determined medically necessary or is necessary for maximizing the enrollee's ability to engage in the specific activity.
…
2 Coverage for Certain Prosthetic Devices. Amend RSA 415:18-n, I to read as follows:
I. Each insurer that issues or renews any policy of group accident or health insurance providing benefits for medical or hospital expenses, except for supplemental policies covering a specified disease or other limited benefit, shall provide to each group, or to the portion of each group comprised of certificate holders of such insurance who are residents of this state and whose principal place of employment is in this state, coverage for benefits for prosthetic devices under the same terms and conditions that apply to other durable medical equipment covered under the policy, except as otherwise provided in this section and except as otherwise provided in RSA 415:18-ff for activity-specific prosthetic devices.
Summary:
This bill expands health insurance coverage for prosthetic devices to include adults, adding to existing coverage for children, with insurers allowed to limit activity-specific devices to one per plan year.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures equitable access to essential healthcare for adults with limb loss by mandating health insurance coverage for prosthetic devices.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may significantly increase health insurance premiums for both individuals and employers due to the substantial cost of prosthetic devices and the potential increase in claims.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 101 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
SB 122-FN
AN ACT relative to financial eligibility for the Medicare savings program.
10 sponsors, Lean Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Rep. Mary Jane Wallner (D), Rep. Lucy Weber (D), Rep. Laura Telerski (D), Rep. David Nagel (R), Sen. David Watters (D), Sen. Suzanne Prentiss (D), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. David Rochefort (R), Sen. Pat Long (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Short Title. This act shall be known as "The Help for Low Income Seniors Act".
2 New Section; Financial Eligibility for Medicare Savings Program. Amend RSA 167 by inserting after section 4-f the following new section:
167:4-g Medicare Savings Program. The department shall administer the Medicare savings program as described in 42 U.S.C. section 1396a(a)(10)(E) in accordance with federal law and this section.
I. Financial eligibility for the Medicare savings program shall include:
(a) A resource disregard, thereby eliminating the resource test; and
(b) Income disregards so that a person with income that is no more than 185 percent of the federal poverty level is qualified as a qualified Medicare beneficiary and a person with income that is more than 185 percent and no more than 250 percent of the federal poverty level is qualified as a qualified individual.
II. The commissioner of the department of health and human services shall adopt rules under RSA 541-A relative to the Medicare savings program in accordance with the requirements of this section.
III. On or before November 1, 2025, the department of health and human services shall prepare and submit to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services any amendments to the state Medicaid plan necessary for implementation of the Medicare savings program, including eliminating the financial eligibility resource test and increasing the financial eligibility income limits as provided in paragraph I.
Summary:
This bill directs the department of health and human services to remove asset limits and increase income thresholds for the Medicare savings program and to submit any required Medicaid plan amendments for implementation.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves access to healthcare for low-income seniors by increasing eligibility for the Medicare Savings Program.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may increase the cost of the Medicare Savings Program without sufficient evidence of its long-term effectiveness.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:15 a.m. in Room 101 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
SB 244-FN-A
AN ACT relative to expanding access to primary health care services, increasing the number of direct health care providers, increasing Medicaid reimbursement rates, and making an appropriation therefor.
11 sponsors, Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Rep. Mary Jane Wallner (D), Rep. Lucy Weber (D), Rep. Laura Telerski (D), Sen. David Watters (D), Sen. Suzanne Prentiss (D), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Donovan Fenton (D), Sen. Debra Altschiller (D), Sen. Tara Reardon (D), Sen. Pat Long (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Short Title. This act shall be known as The New Hampshire Needs Caregivers Act.
…
3 Department of Health and Human Services; Division of Public Health Services; Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub; Infrastructure Contracts.
I. The department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section shall amend its current contract with Bi-State Primary Care Association’s Recruitment Center to require the Recruitment Center to strengthen the infrastructure needed to sustain and transform community-based primary care services through the creation of a Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub that promotes collaboration across the continuum of care. Bi-State Primary Care Association shall administer the Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub and manage the sub-recipient contracts, and leverage federal, state, and private funding, and seek new funding opportunities when appropriate.
II. Bi-State Primary Care Association shall design the sub-recipient contracts to facilitate health care workforce development, recruitment, retention, support nursing preceptor and mentoring programs, provide training and technical assistance, and loan repayment opportunities. Bi-State Primary Care Association shall:
(a) Expand and implement its national outreach and marketing campaign designed to recruit qualified clinicians to New Hampshire;
(b) Collaborate with an area health education center to increase the number of entry-level clinical staff through investments in programs designed to improve care and access to care, particularly in rural and underserved areas of this state, and to enhance the health and public health workforce in New Hampshire. Such programs may include: engaging under-represented populations in the health care professions in middle school and high school; offering health professions students opportunities to experience learning in rural or medically underserved regions of New Hampshire designed to encourage participants to settle and work in these regions; and enriching the standard health curriculum by providing health professions students training in aspects of health care such as integration of behavioral health and primary care, social determinants of health, cultural competency, interprofessional team-based care, and addressing the challenges associated with substance misuse through career ladder training and leadership programming. The area health education center shall partner with the New Hampshire Nurses Association by convening stakeholders to build a collective voice for nursing excellence and workforce sustainability in New Hampshire by determining the current initiatives that collect demand, supply, and academic workforce data, and identify the gaps. The stakeholders shall make recommendations for a future New Hampshire Nursing Workforce Center as designated by the National Forum of Nursing Workforce Centers;
(c) Collaborate with an area health education center for the purpose of creating and expanding graduate level nursing mentoring and precepting programs. The area health education center shall provide the necessary support to graduate level nursing preceptors and the health care organizations that act as training sites;
(d) Collaborate with an area health education center for the purpose of supporting the New Hampshire Needs Caregivers Program. This program shall promote, recruit, and fund training of up to 500 individuals interested in a career in health care as a licensed nursing assistant. The New Hampshire Needs Caregivers Program shall create scholarship opportunities to cover the cost of tuition for licensed nursing assistant training up to $2,600; supportive services; and assist individuals in finding courses and employment;
(e) Expand student loan repayment opportunities for clinicians with bachelors’ degrees employed by non-profit health care organizations in exchange for the agreement to work for the non-profit health care organization for 24 months for part-time employees to 36 months for full-time employees; and
(f) Collaborate with a family medicine residency program in rural New Hampshire at a teaching health center program to support the training of family medicine residents in the north country. The teaching health center program shall be accredited or eligible for accreditation by a nationally recognized accreditation agency.
4 Department of Health and Human Services; Rural Health and Primary Care Section; Appropriations.
I. Appropriation; Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub. The sum of $580,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $580,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose set forth in paragraph I of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
II. Appropriation; Workforce Recruitment, Advertising, and Marketing. The sum of $250,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and $250,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose described in paragraph II(a) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
III. Appropriation; Bi-State Primary Care Association Sub-Recipient Contract with an Area Health Education Center. The sum of $3,100,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $3,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose set forth in paragraph II(b) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
IV. Appropriation; Bi-State Primary Care Association Sub-Recipient Contract with an Area Health Education Center; Graduate Nursing Student Preceptors and Financial Support for Host Organizations. The sum of $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose set forth in paragraph II(c) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
V. Appropriation; Bi-State Primary Care Association sub-recipient contract with an area health education center; New Hampshire Needs Caregivers. The sum of $500,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $750,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose set forth in paragraph II(d) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
VI. Appropriation; Bi-State Primary Care Association sub-recipient contracts; Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub Loan Repayment Programs. The sum of $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purpose set forth in paragraph II(e) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
VII. Appropriation; Bi-State Primary Care Association sub-recipient contract with a rural residency training at a teaching health center program. The sum of $500,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $500,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the purposes set forth in paragraph II(f) of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sum out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
VIII. Appropriation; State Loan Repayment Program. The sum of $1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $1,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section for the state loan repayment program. This appropriation shall be nonlapsing. Of this appropriation, the sums of $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and $300,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 shall be expended by clinicians in the nursing profession. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
IX. Appropriation; Early Childhood and Family Mental Health Credential. The sum of $203,500 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $203,500 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, bureau of children's behavioral health for the purpose set forth in RSA 167:3-l, IV(a)(2). The bureau shall use the funding to support the training of up to 60 clinicians per year of the biennium. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
X. Appropriation; Primary Care Workforce Program. The sum of $115,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $115,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section, for an administrator I position for the purpose of administering paragraph I of section 3 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
XI. Appropriation; Primary Care Workforce Program. The sum of $91,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $91,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section, for a compliance coordinator II position for the purpose of administering paragraph VIII of section 4 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
XII. Appropriation; Primary Care Workforce Program. The sum of $81,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $81,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027 are hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services, division of public health services, rural health and primary care section, for an administrative assistant I position for the purpose of administering paragraph VIII of section 4 of this act. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
5 Department of Health and Human Services; Medicaid Rate Increases; Appropriation.
I. The commissioner of the department of health and human services shall increase Medicaid provider rates by 3 percent in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and an additional 3 percent in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027. The commissioner shall make the necessary adjustments to the medical rate setting data book and direct the actuary and managed care organizations to pass through the increased funding to rates.
II. There is hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services the sum of $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026, and the sum of $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027, for the purpose of increasing Medicaid provider rates. The department shall utilize such funds to increase rates pursuant to section 1902(a)(30)(A) of the Social Security Act, to promote efficiency, economy, and quality of care within New Hampshire's Medicaid program. The department may accept and expend any federal funds available for the purposes of this section without the prior approval of the fiscal committee of the general court. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated. The rate increases shall go into effect no later than January 1, 2026. If feasible, the department shall implement any of the rate increases prior to that date, with priority given to those the commissioner has deemed most critical. For each provider rate increase, the department shall report to the fiscal committee of the general court, by October 1, 2025, the accounting units in the state operating budget to which funds will be or have been allocated, along with the rate increases that will be provided from the funds appropriated.
III. There is hereby appropriated to the department of health and human services the sum of $2,600,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026 and the sum of $2,600,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2027, for the purpose of increasing rates paid to providers of opioid treatment programs. Said amounts are intended to cover the cost of rate increases for both the traditional Medicaid population and granite advantage program population. The department may accept and expend any federal funds available for the purposes of this section without the prior approval of the fiscal committee of the general court. The governor is authorized to draw a warrant for said sums out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
Summary:
This bill aims to expand access to primary health care services in New Hampshire by increasing funding for recruitment and retention programs, amending contracts with the Bi-State Primary Care Association's Recruitment Center to create a Public-Private Health Care Workforce Recruitment and Retention Hub, and increasing Medicaid reimbursement rates.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will address New Hampshire's critical healthcare workforce shortage by investing in recruitment, retention, and training programs, ultimately improving access to care for all residents.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may lead to increased state spending without sufficient evidence of long-term cost-effectiveness or a guaranteed improvement in healthcare access.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 101 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
SB 137-FN
AN ACT relative to hospital stays covered under the state Medicaid plan.
Bill text (PDF) - Docket Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Suzanne Prentiss (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Coverage for Hospital Stays under the State Medicaid Plan. Amend RSA 126-A by inserting after section 18-b the following new section:
126-A:18-c Coverage for Hospital Stays under the State Medicaid Plan.
Hospital stays shall be covered under the state Medicaid plan as follows:
I.(a) The department shall establish an administrative day rate for those days of hospital stay in which a client does not meet criteria for acute inpatient level of care, but is not discharged because:
(1) An appropriate placement outside the hospital is not available; or
(2) The postpartum parent's newborn remains on an inpatient claim for monitoring post-in utero exposure to substances that may lead to physiologic dependence and continuous care by the postpartum parent is the appropriate first-line treatment. "Postpartum parent" means the client who delivered the baby or babies.
(b) The department shall use the annual statewide weighted average nursing facility Medicaid payment rate to update the all-inclusive administrative day rate on November 1st of each year.
(c) The administrative day rate shall include pharmacy services, pharmaceuticals, and medically necessary ancillary services, as determined by the department, when these services are provided during administrative days.
(d) The department shall identify administrative days during the length of stay review process after the client's discharge from the hospital.
(e) The state Medicaid plan shall cover up to 5 newborn administrative days and may include additional days with expedited prior authorization (EPA). For EPA, the hospital shall establish that the clinically appropriate EPA criteria outlined in the department's published billing guides have been met, and the hospital shall use the appropriate EPA number for billing purposes.
…
II. ?The department shall establish a swing bed day rate for those days when a client is receiving department-approved nursing service level of care in a swing bed.
(a) The department shall not pay a hospital the rate applicable to the acute inpatient level of care for those days of a hospital stay when a client is receiving department-approved nursing service level of care in a swing bed.
Summary:
This bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to establish administrative and swing bed day rates under the state Medicaid program for certain hospital stays, including minimum stays for mothers of newborns.
Potential Argument For:
This bill improves access to essential postpartum care for mothers and newborns by establishing Medicaid reimbursement rates for administrative and swing bed days, ensuring necessary support during this critical period.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may increase Medicaid expenditures without sufficient evidence of improved health outcomes or cost-effectiveness compared to existing care models.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:45 a.m. in Room 101 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
SB 134-FN
AN ACT relative to work requirements under the state Medicaid program.
9 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Rep. Jason Osborne (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Rep. Jess Edwards (R), Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Sen. Keith Murphy (R), Sen. Tim McGough (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Hampshire Granite Advantage Health Care Program 1115 Demonstration; Renewed Application to CMS. On or before July 1, 2025, the department of health and human services shall resubmit to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) a 1115 demonstration waiver to the state Medicaid plan relative to enforcing community engagement and work requirements as a condition of Granite Advantage eligibility. Beginning November 1, 2025 and annually thereafter, the department shall provide a report regarding the status of the waiver application and implementation of the community engagement requirements in RSA 126-AA:2, III, to the senate president, the speaker of the house of representatives, the senate clerk, the house clerk, and the governor.
Summary:
This bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to resubmit a 1115 demonstration waiver to CMS regarding community engagement and work requirements under the state Medicaid program and to provide an annual report to the legislature on its implementation.
Potential Argument For:
This bill ensures New Hampshire actively pursues necessary waivers to maintain and improve its Medicaid program, promoting responsible healthcare access.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may impose undue burdens on Medicaid recipients through community engagement and work requirements, potentially reducing healthcare access for vulnerable populations.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 1:00 p.m. in Room 101 in the Legislative Office Building and streaming on YouTube.
Senate Ways And Means
SB 60-FN
AN ACT relative to advanced deposit account wagering.
5 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Keith Murphy (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Pari-Mutuel Pools, and Distribution of Tax Theron; Advanced Deposit Account Wagering. Amend RSA 284 by inserting after section 22-b the following new section:
284:22-c Advanced Deposit Account Wagering.
I. Advance deposit wagering is authorized for pari-mutuel betting on horse racing under this chapter if conducted in compliance with this section and the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978, United States Code, Title 15, section 3001 et seq.
II. It is unlawful for any person or entity to accept an advance deposit wager from a New Hampshire resident unless the person or entity is a licensed advance deposit wagering provider in the state of New Hampshire.
III. Before accepting an advance deposit wager from a New Hampshire resident, a licensed advance deposit wagering provider shall demonstrate evidence of financial responsibility in a format prescribed by the commission through a surety bond executed and issued by an insurer authorized to issue surety bonds in this state, an irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of financial guarantee in an amount to be determined by the commission. The commission may also accept, as evidence of financial responsibility, a surety bond, an irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of financial guarantee in accordance with this subdivision filed with one or more states where the applicant is licensed as an advance deposit wagering provider. The commission may ask for additional evidence of financial responsibility at any time the commission deems necessary. Any surety bond, an irrevocable letter of credit, or other form of financial guarantee issued under this subdivision shall be in favor of this state and shall specifically authorize recovery by the commission for the payment of all revenues required by this chapter as well as payments due to New Hampshire resident account holders.
Summary:
This bill authorizes advanced deposit wagering on horse racing in New Hampshire, requiring licensees to pay 1.25% of wagers from state residents to the education trust fund and establishing regulatory measures for providers.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will generate revenue for the state's education trust fund by regulating and taxing advanced deposit wagering on horse racing, currently operating without state oversight.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill's regulation of advanced deposit wagering on horse racing could stifle the industry's growth and negatively impact the current, unregulated market.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:15 a.m. in Room 100 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 63-FN
AN ACT relative to funding for the division of travel and tourism.
9 sponsors, Bipartisan
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Sen. David Watters (D), Sen. Regina Birdsell (R), Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Tara Reardon (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Department of Business and Economic Affairs; Division of Travel and Tourism Budget; Meals and Rooms Tax Revenue. Amend RSA 12-O:11-b to read as follows:
12-O:11-b Division of Travel and Tourism Budget; Meals and Rooms Tax Revenue. The budget of the division of travel and tourism, including the travel and tourism development fund established by RSA 12-O:16, shall be funded at an amount no less than 3.15 percent of the net income identified by RSA 78-A:26, I, plus the income identified under RSA 78-A:26, III, for the most recently completed fiscal year.
Summary:
This bill increases the Division of Travel and Tourism's budget by including the Municipal Revenue Fund in the calculation of the meals and rooms tax revenue.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will improve the New Hampshire Division of Travel and Tourism's ability to promote tourism and support local businesses by increasing their funding.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lead to increased spending and less fiscal responsibility by using a larger amount of the meals and rooms tax revenue for the Division of Travel and Tourism.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 100 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 275
AN ACT providing property tax relief for some child care agencies.
8 sponsors, Lean Democratic
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. David Watters (D), Rep. Laurel Stavis (D), Sen. Kevin Avard (R), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D), Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (D), Sen. Debra Altschiller (D), Sen. Pat Long (D)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 Taxation; Persons and Property Liable to Taxation; Real Estate and Personal Property Tax Exemption. Amend RSA 72:23, IV to read as follows:
IV. The buildings and structures of schools, child day care agencies, residential child care agencies, … ; provided further that if the value of the dormitories, dining rooms and kitchens shall exceed $150,000, the value thereof in excess of said sum shall be taxable. A town at an annual town meeting or the governing body of a city may vote to increase the amount of the exemption upon dormitories, dining rooms and kitchens.
2 Persons and Property Liable to Taxation; Real Estate and Personal Property Tax Exemption; Definition Added. Amend RSA 72:23, VII to read as follows:
VII. For the purposes of this section: [, the term]
(a) "Charitable" shall have the meaning set forth in RSA 72:23-l.
(b) "Child day care agency" shall have the meaning set forth in RSA 170-E:2, IV.
3 Education; School Money; Grant for School Construction. Amend RSA 198:15-a, III to read as follows:
III. Facilities constructed using school building aid grants shall be used as instructional facilities for [kindergarten] preschool through grade 12 for at least 20 years. A school district or chartered public school that discontinues the use of the facilities within 20 years shall be required to repay the state 100 percent of the state grant received. Upon a showing of good cause by the school district or chartered public school, the commissioner of the department of education may waive this penalty in whole or part on a case by case basis.
Summary:
This bill amends RSA 72:23, IV to provide property tax exemptions for child day care agencies, residential child care agencies, and other specified entities; amends RSA 72:23, VII to define "child day care agency"; and amends RSA 198:15-a, III to clarify that school building aid grants may be used for preschool through grade 12 facilities.
Potential Argument For:
This bill provides crucial property tax relief to child care agencies, enabling them to better serve children and families while reducing financial burdens.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill may reduce municipal tax revenue and disproportionately benefit certain child care providers, potentially leading to unequal access to care.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 9:45 a.m. in Room 100 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 83-FN
AN ACT establishing an elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf property tax exemption reimbursement fund, authorizing video lottery terminals, renaming the lottery commission, and creating a voluntary statewide self-exclusion database.
5 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Rep. Michael Moffett (R), Sen. Kevin Avard (R), Sen. Bill Gannon (R), Sen. Howard Pearl (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 State Lottery and Gaming Commission. Amend RSA 284:21-a to read as follows:
284:21-a State Lottery and Gaming Commission. … The commission shall be properly addressed as the “New Hampshire lottery and gaming commission” but all statutory and regulatory references to “lottery commission” shall remain valid and shall be used synonymously.
2 Definitions. Amend RSA 287-D:1, XII to read as follows:
XII. “Video Lottery Terminal” or “VLT” means any device which, upon payment of bills, coins or vouchers, is available to play or operate and may entitle the patron to receive cash, vouchers, or electronic credits redeemable for cash. The results, including options available to the patron, are randomly determined by the device. A device may use spinning reels or video displays or both. This definition does not include any device that sells lottery tickets, pari-mutuel wagers, nor any device which is operated through, utilizes, or is played on or with assistance from the Internet.
…
3 Rulemaking. Amend RSA 287-D:3, XVII to read as follows:
XVII. The licensing and enforcement of VLT licensees, terminals, and compliance requirements under RSA 287-J.
…
4 New Chapter; Video Lottery Terminals. Amend RSA by inserting after chapter 287-I the following new chapter:
CHAPTER 287-J
VIDEO LOTTERY TERMINALS
…
287-J:5 Operation of Video Lottery Terminals.
I. Prior to use all VLTs must have been tested by an independent testing laboratory and approved by the commission to ensure integrity and proper working order.
II. VLTs shall not accept a wager in excess of $25.
III. No VLT shall be operated except within the facility of an eligible VLT licensee during the facility's approved hours of play of charitable games.
IV. VLTs shall operate to ensure a minimum average daily aggregate payback of 88 percent computed for all VLTs operated at each facility on a quarterly basis.
V. VLTs shall operate pursuant to any other such characteristics as the commission may establish by rule to safeguard the integrity of gaming in New Hampshire.
287-J:6 Revenue Share.
I. Each VLT licensee shall collect a sum equal to 40 percent of gross video lottery revenue for distribution under paragraph II.
II.(a) Each licensee shall distribute 35 percent of the amount collected under paragraph I to charitable organizations with whom the licensee contracts on each licensed game date. Each VLT licensee must contract with 2 licensed charitable organizations for each game date.
(b) The remainder of the total amount collected by the licensee under paragraph I shall be paid to the commission and distributed as follows:
(1) 25 percent to the special fund established under RSA 284:21-j for use as provided in that section;
(2) 25 percent to the elderly-disabled-blind-deaf exemption reimbursement fund established under RSA 72:42-a.
(3) 50 percent to fund retirement benefits for group II members of the retirement system under RSA 100-A.
…
6 New Section; Elderly-Disabled-Blind-Deaf Exemption Reimbursement Fund Established. Amend RSA 72 by inserting after section 42 the following new section:
72:42-a Elderly, Disabled, Blind, and Deaf Exemption Reimbursement Fund established
I. There is hereby established an elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf exemption reimbursement fund ("fund"). The purpose of the fund shall be to reimburse municipalities for revenue not realized due to tax exemptions utilized in their communities under RSAs 72:37, 72:37-b, 72:38-b, 72:39-a, and 72:39-b. The fund shall be funded by fees collected pursuant to RSA 287-J:6, II(b)(2).
Summary:
This bill establishes a fund to reimburse municipalities for property tax exemptions for the elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf, authorizes video lottery terminals at charitable gaming facilities, creates a statewide self-exclusion list for problem gambling, and renames the state lottery commission. Video lottery terminals are very similar to slot machines.
Potential Argument For:
This bill increases state revenue, aids municipalities facing revenue shortfalls from property tax exemptions, and provides resources to combat problem gambling.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could lead to increased problem gambling and may not fully compensate municipalities for lost property tax revenue.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 100 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.
SB 168-FN-L
AN ACT regulating online gambling and directing net proceeds to the education trust fund, the general fund, and to reimburse municipalities for elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf tax exemptions.
4 sponsors, Republican
Sponsor(s): (Prime) Sen. Timothy Lang (R), Sen. Daniel Innis (R), Sen. Howard Pearl (R), Sen. Keith Murphy (R)
Selected quote(s) from the bill:
1 New Section; Elderly, Disabled, Blind, and Deaf Exemption Reimbursement Fund Established. Amend RSA 72 by inserting after section 42 the following new section:
72:42-a Elderly, Disabled, Blind, and Deaf Exemption Reimbursement Fund Established.
I. There is hereby established in the state treasury an elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf exemption reimbursement fund. The nonlapsing fund shall be kept separate and distinct and separate from all other funds and shall be continually appropriated to the department of revenue administration for the purposes of this section. The fund shall be used to reimburse municipalities for revenue not realized due to tax exemptions utilized in their communities under RSAs 72:37, 72:37-b, 72:38-b, 72:39-a, and 72:39-b. The fund shall be funded by fees collected pursuant to RSA 287-J:7.
…
3 New Chapter; Online Gaming. Amend RSA by inserting after chapter 287-I the following new chapter:
CHAPTER 287-J
ONLINE GAMING
…
287-J:7 Revenue Share.
I. Each licensee under this chapter shall collect a sum equal to 45 percent of gross online gaming revenue for distribution under paragraph II.
II. The total amount collected by the licensee under paragraph I shall be paid to the commission and distributed as follows:
(a) Twenty-five percent to the special fund established under RSA 284:21-j for use as provided in that section.
(b) Twenty-five percent to the elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf exemption reimbursement fund established pursuant to RSA 72:42-a.
(c) Fifty percent to the general fund.
…
287-J:9 Acceptance of Out-of-State Wagers. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, wagers may be accepted pursuant to this chapter from persons who are not physically present in the state of New Hampshire if the commission has determined that:
Summary:
This bill establishes an elderly, disabled, blind, and deaf exemption reimbursement fund, funded by a 25% revenue share from newly legalized online gambling, to reimburse municipalities for tax exemptions.
Potential Argument For:
This bill will generate significant revenue for the state while also providing much-needed financial relief to municipalities struggling with the costs of property tax exemptions.
Potential Argument Against:
This bill could potentially violate the state constitution by diverting lottery revenue away from educational purposes and may not accurately account for the long-term costs of reimbursement to municipalities.
Hearing: Wednesday, Feb 05 at 10:15 a.m. in Room 100 in the State House and streaming on YouTube.