Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee of the special Family Court committee on Title IV met to review how Title IV-D child support funding works in New Hampshire, where the money comes from, and how it is used. Members discussed an LBA report showing funding amounts, including roughly $1 million for Title IV-D and an additional $50,000 for the Office of Mediation and Arbitration, and asked how that compares with the court system’s overall budget. Staff explained that the program is federally required, that the state submits monthly spending and receives about 66% back from the federal government, and that incentive payments are separate from the regular budget. A court/child support representative explained the program’s functions: establishing paternity, establishing and modifying support orders, enforcing orders, and collecting current support and arrears. The representative said most cases are not TANF cases anymore; less than 10% are TANF, and both TANF and non-TANF cases are handled similarly. The discussion also covered the role of the court versus the department, with staff saying the department works under a memorandum of understanding with the court, prepares uniform support orders when parties agree, and then submits them for court approval. The court’s expedited process and hearings officers were described as key parts of the system. Members asked about incentives, wage garnishment, and whether participation is voluntary. Staff said the incentive measures are based on five performance areas—paternity establishment, support order establishment, current collections, arrears collections, and cost effectiveness—and are calculated across the caseload, not per individual case. More than 70% of orders were said to involve wage assignments, and payors can request that payments go through the program to keep records. Staff also explained that cases are application-driven, that if one party applies the case can still proceed even if the other does not want to participate, and that if an order requires payment through the program it must be changed by the court to alter that arrangement. The representative also said all enforcement staff are New Hampshire state employees, not federal employees, though there is a federal office in Boston that provides technical support. The program is audited annually, including data reliability reviews, and the state plan and federal statutes govern the requirements. No votes or formal actions were taken during the discussion.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Children and Family Law subcommittee met in work session on retained Bill HB 1590, which concerns training on child abuse and neglect protection. The chair repeatedly emphasized that this was not a public hearing, that the subcommittee could not amend HB 1590 or vote on the bill itself, and that its role was only to make an informal recommendation to the full committee on whether further legislation should be pursued. The chair also noted the full committee would meet Tuesday, October 22 at 10:30 a.m., alongside retained Bill 1269 on restraints in schools. Representative Long, the original sponsor, said the bill should be further legislated because testimony raised unresolved questions, including who would be required to take the training, what the training would cover, and how often certification would be required. Representative Sidel also supported continuing the bill, saying it had potential but should be broadened beyond a limited group of mandated trainees to include others such as first responders and child specialists who interact with children and families. Other members generally agreed the issue merited further work, but several raised concerns about whether the proposal would improperly legislate medical practice, whether the training would replace or add to existing continuing education requirements, and who would accredit any training program. One member suggested that professional associations might be a better source for additional CEUs. After discussion, the subcommittee used a thumb vote and reached a unanimous recommendation to move forward with further legislation on HB 1590, to be reported to the full Children and Family Law Committee.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began with a work session on several school-funding-related interim study bills, including HB 514, HB 1563, and related measures tied to the state’s “swept” school-funding issue. Members discussed the pending New Hampshire Supreme Court cases and whether the committee should recommend future legislation before those decisions are issued. Some members argued the committee should wait for the court, while others said it was prudent to have draft options ready. HB 514 and HB 1563 were described as different approaches to the swept issue, and the chair later closed the work session on those bills. The committee then considered HB 5 on the business enterprise tax rate, HB 100 to repeal the interest and dividends tax, HB 133 on repealing the communications services tax, and HB 1422, a broader tax package involving business profits, business enterprise, communications services, and rooms and meals taxes. Members split between those who wanted to leave tax policy to a future legislature and those who wanted the committee to signal that future legislation is warranted. HB 5 ended in a 10-10 tie and was reported without recommendation. HB 100 was voted 20-0 not recommended. HB 133 also split 10-10 and was reported without recommendation. HB 1422 was discussed as too broad and was voted not recommended. The committee also discussed HB 1492, another tax-related measure, with members again debating whether the committee should act now or leave the issue for later. The main themes were the state’s revenue needs, the effect of prior tax changes, and whether the committee’s votes would meaningfully guide future legislatures. After a short recess, the committee moved into executive session and took the recorded votes on the bills.

Keywords: Commission to Study the Effect of Recent Changes Made to Charitable Gaming Laws, Including the Newly Authorized Historical Horse Races, 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to begin shaping its final report on charitable gaming and historic horse racing (HHR). Members agreed to note that the legislature had already removed the rent issue from the law, so that charge was disposed of. They also agreed that HHR has increased revenues to charities, and that the current cap of 19 HHR licenses, along with the six- to seven-year moratorium, should be treated as a pause for reevaluation rather than a recommendation for immediate expansion. Members discussed that the market is still developing, with several large facilities under construction or pending, and that the industry should be reviewed again in the future, with some members suggesting a five-year reevaluation point. The commission also discussed whether to limit other charitable gaming or games-of-chance licenses. The consensus was that the moratorium on HHR already functions as a de facto limit on expansion, but that no additional restrictions should be placed on ordinary games of chance or smaller charitable gaming operations. Members emphasized that the discussion was focused on HHR proliferation and that regular charitable gaming had not raised similar concerns. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on host-community revenue sharing and whether municipalities should receive a share of proceeds from charitable gaming establishments. Some members argued that large facilities create public-safety, zoning, and infrastructure costs and that municipalities should receive some form of relief, possibly through unused dates or a percentage of gross gaming revenue. Others argued that existing property taxes, site-plan review, and local permitting already address municipal impacts, and that there was no data showing disproportionate public-safety costs. The group also briefly discussed how charities are selected and whether a uniform process should exist, but that item was not resolved in the portion of the meeting provided.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard from Dana Call on the state’s inactive dedicated funds review. She explained that the “big green book” and accompanying inactive-funds list are organized to match agency presentations, with agencies either appearing in the current review cycle or being available for follow-up if they are not scheduled to testify. She noted that many inactive funds are newly created or donation-based and may show little or no activity for a couple of years, and said she could add current balances to the table if the committee wanted. Members asked about how to interpret newer fund numbers, whether the Judicial Council should still appear in the book after repeal of its last fund, and whether the report could be revised to include balances; Call said she would check on the Judicial Council and could add a balance column. The committee then reviewed the status of legislation and noted that House Bill 16 from the prior year had passed and been signed by the governor, with one change increasing veterinarians’ reimbursement for neutering fees from 80% to 100%. The committee then moved into agency reviews, beginning with the Banking Department. Bank Commissioner Amelia Galder testified that the department has one dedicated fund that is essential to its operations and should remain active. She explained that the department is self-funded through legislative appropriations, fees, fines, and, if needed, an end-of-year assessment, with the dedicated fund used to repay the appropriation. Members asked about the size and predictability of fines and fees, the typical cost and frequency of bank examinations, and whether fines should be separated from exam-fee funding; Galder said fines and exam fees are tracked separately internally, but both flow into the same fund. The committee next heard from the New Hampshire Veterans Home. Commandant Kim McKay and Board of Managers Chair Paul Lloyd described the home as an intermediate long-term care facility established in 1890, licensed for 250 beds and currently serving 129 veterans, with staffing shortages limiting census growth. They said the home’s funding comes from VA payments, resident room-and-board payments, and general funds, and that it has three dedicated funds: the benefit account, the Guide Thompson Memorial Trust, and the members account. McKay explained that the benefit account supports resident quality-of-life activities and facilities, the memorial trust is a principal-preserving account used for holiday support, and the members account holds residents’ personal funds. Members questioned a reported balance discrepancy in the benefit fund, recalled a past unpaid fuel-oil bill issue, and asked how a recent $87,374 donation would be used; McKay said it would fund wheelchair-accessible improvements around a pond in honor of a deceased resident. The committee also discussed staffing, wait times, and how VA reimbursement rates vary by resident disability status.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on September 13, 2024, and first adopted the minutes and a consent calendar covering Tabs 3 through 7, with two Department of Health and Human Services items, 24281 and 24284, pulled for discussion. On item 24281, DHHS Chief Financial Officer Nathan White discussed the state’s Mission Zero effort to reduce emergency department boarding and wait times, noting that the committee member’s cited dashboard showed fluctuations and that the overall trend had been improving, though he said he would need to consult experts for a fuller analysis. The item was adopted. On item 24284, White explained that the funding extension related to call center support and Medicaid-related eligibility work; he said the call center remains needed to handle eligibility calls and prevent added burdens on staff and longer wait times. That item was also adopted. The committee then heard item 24303, involving DHHS and the PATH transitional housing program for individuals leaving New Hampshire Hospital. White explained the program’s history, saying it began in 2020, was later operated by NFI North, and that the funding in question carried forward earlier appropriations and was tied in part to reducing emergency department wait times under Mission Zero. He said the funds were not double-budgeted and that other DHHS funds had separate purposes. The item was adopted after discussion that also touched on the federal court order concerning emergency room boarding and the six-hour target for moving individuals with certified IEA out of the ER. Under Tab 10, the committee considered Cannon Mountain pricing recommendations from the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. New mountain manager Jace Worth introduced himself and said the proposed changes were based on a pricing study, rising costs, and efforts to increase revenue yield through variable pricing. Members questioned increases for New Hampshire seniors and military day passes, with Worth saying most days would still have lower rates, while peak periods would carry higher prices to reflect demand. He said the mountain faced about a $1.5 million deficit, partly from utility costs, and expected the pricing changes, cost controls, and a renegotiated utility contract to help close the gap. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved a Department of Transportation money transfer and moved into a large set of ARPA late items. Several members objected to the late timing of the requests, saying the committee needs more time to review complex funding items and that late items should be limited to urgent cases; the chair acknowledged the concern and said future October late items would not be accepted after noon on Wednesday. Despite the concern, the committee adopted late items 312 through 317, covering Agriculture, Safety, and Emergency Relief and Recovery. On item 318, a question was raised about a new living arrangement project described as the first of its kind in the state; the discussion was not completed in the portion provided.

Keywords: Committee to Study the Impact of Pharmacy Benefit Manager Operations on Cost, Administration, and Distribution of Prescription Drugs, 928, house, all

Summary: The study committee on SB 560 met to examine pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) operations, the cost administration and distribution of prescription drugs, and the Insurance Department’s oversight authority. Chair Gary Merchant outlined two main topics: the department’s regulatory authority over PBMs and a discussion of maximum allowable cost (MAC) pricing, including testimony from a Medicaid pharmacist. Michelle Heaton, Director of Life and Health at the New Hampshire Insurance Department, presented an overview of the department’s framework and the distinctions among third-party administrators (TPAs), PBMs, health carriers, and managed care products. Heaton explained that TPAs are licensed entities that provide administrative support to insurers, while PBMs are a subset of TPAs focused on prescription drug coverage and are regulated under RSA 402-N. She said PBMs must register with the department, meet solvency and reporting requirements, and may also need other licenses depending on their activities. She emphasized that the department’s authority depends on the market involved: it can review and investigate commercial insurance products and the entities administering them, but it generally lacks jurisdiction over self-funded, Medicare, Medicaid, and other federally regulated plans. She also noted that if a PBM is owned by an insurer and works solely for that insurer, it may fall within statutory exceptions; if it contracts with other carriers or self-funded plans, it may need separate registration or licensing. Committee members pressed Heaton on whether the department truly oversees large vertically integrated PBMs such as CVS, Express Scripts, and Optum, and whether complaints from pharmacies, patients, or providers have a clear place to go. Merchant expressed concern that registration alone may not provide enough accountability and asked who is ultimately responsible for fiduciary duties and claims payment. Heaton responded that the carrier remains responsible for the insurance product and for ensuring claims are paid, even when a PBM or TPA administers benefits under contract. She said the department can examine and audit these entities, review financial filings, and investigate illegal conduct, but disputes outside a contract generally remain between the contracting parties. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all