HB 409 revises New Hampshire’s election recount fee schedule so that recount charges are tied to the size of the election and the margin between the candidates, rather than relying on the prior structure. For elections with more than 1,000 votes cast, the bill sets tiered fees ranging from $100 to $2,500 depending on how close the result is; for elections with 1,000 votes or fewer, it sets lower tiered fees ranging from $50 to $150. The bill also changes the refund rule so that certain recount fees are returned if the recount result is within a specified margin, and it requires the Secretary of State to issue an annual report on recount requests, fees collected, outcomes, and costs.
In practical terms, the bill would amend RSA 660:2 and RSA 660:6, changing how recount fees are calculated and when they are refunded. It would also create a reporting requirement for the Secretary of State, adding a recurring administrative disclosure obligation to the recount process. The fiscal note indicates the bill does not appropriate new funds or create new positions, but it could increase expenditures from the Recount Administrative and Fee Account because the capped fees may be lower than the actual cost of some recounts, especially in larger races.
Impact
The bill would alter state election law by replacing the existing recount fee framework with a vote-count-based tiered schedule and by adding a statutory annual reporting requirement for recount activity and costs. It affects candidates or other applicants seeking recounts, the Secretary of State’s office, and the Recount Administrative and Fee Account. The fiscal note suggests the state could face indeterminable but potentially increased costs when recount fees do not cover the full expense of conducting recounts in larger contests.
Sentiment
The available materials suggest a generally procedural and administrative purpose rather than a highly ideological one. The bill appears aimed at making recount fees more predictable and scaled to election size, which may be viewed as a fairness or access improvement for close races. At the same time, the fiscal note flags potential increased state costs and longer recount processing times, indicating some concern about the financial and operational effects of the new fee cap structure.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between affordability for recount applicants and the state’s ability to recover the full cost of conducting recounts. The Department of State’s fiscal analysis notes that recounts in larger races can cost well over $10,000, while the bill caps fees at $2,500 in some cases, potentially shifting costs to the state. Another issue is that the bill may encourage more recount requests in larger-margin races because the fee is capped below actual cost, which could increase administrative burden and delay completion of recounts. No committee transcript or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of partisan or member-specific opposition in the materials supplied.