Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up an amended bill, sponsored by Rep. Lily Walsh, aimed at requiring certain foreign principals involved in New Hampshire real estate transactions to file an affidavit electronically with the Department of Justice. Walsh explained that she revised the proposal after the first hearing by limiting it to leases longer than 14 days, removing notarization, allowing electronic filing, shortening notification timelines, and clarifying that lessors or agents would not have to verify the affidavit’s truthfulness. She asked the committee to recommend the bill ought to pass with amendment and also noted a technical correction to use “real estate licensee” rather than “realtor.” The main opposition came from a real estate practitioner on the committee, who argued the bill was burdensome, could create discrimination concerns, and would place real estate professionals in an improper enforcement role. He also questioned the bill’s practical effect and pointed to existing federal CFIUS procedures as a better mechanism for handling foreign investment concerns. Several members echoed concerns about whether the state had authority to regulate in this area, whether the bill would actually stop bad actors, and whether it could be enforced without discriminatory impacts. Representatives from New Boston Space Force Station testified in support, saying the legislation was critical to national security because proximity to the installation could allow adversaries to observe operations or interfere with radio frequency communications. They argued federal processes were too slow or ineffective and that state action could better push hostile actors away from the base. Committee members questioned the technical basis for the 10-mile buffer, whether it would really help, and why federal agencies were not handling the issue. No vote was taken during the exchange shown in the transcript.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a hearing on a non-germane amendment to SB 302, a Senate bill originally requiring background checks for solid waste and hazardous waste facility owners. Representative Patenza explained that the amendment was intended to preserve and separate out language developed for the governor’s budget proposal and HB 2 concerning a solid waste facility site evaluation committee, a moratorium, and related public-benefit/site-benefit provisions, so the policy would still have a vehicle if the budget language did not advance. He said the proposal reflects extensive work by the House, the governor’s office, and DES, and he was open to further changes to align with any budget conference committee outcome. Dr. Adam Finkele testified in support of the amendment and the underlying site evaluation concept, arguing that landfill siting decisions should be based on cost-benefit analysis that includes public harms, local impacts, and regional impacts rather than only private benefits. He praised the committee process and prior legislation requiring agencies to respond substantively to public comments, and said the new language improves on the governor’s version by moving the committee’s review earlier in the process and requiring more complete application information, including alternatives and impacts on nearby wells and aquifers. He also supported a three-year moratorium on new landfill applications, saying it would give the state time to address leachate, PFAS, waste reduction, and weak siting rules. Members asked about possible conference committee changes, the value of having a separate review body, and whether the new rules would invite litigation. Dr. Finkele said he would likely sue over the rules because he считает them too weak, but also said the legislature could fix the problems through other bills such as HB 77. He acknowledged that the site evaluation committee is not a perfect solution, but said it is a useful intermediate step between the agency and the courts and likely would meet only rarely if capacity need remains the main trigger for future landfill decisions. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 74, which would require agencies issuing certain real-property-related permits to track and report how many permits they issue and how long the process takes. Representative Carol McGuire introduced the bill and said the goal is to gather data on permit timing and fees, especially for DES and DOT permits involving wetlands, alteration of terrain, driveway permits, and similar approvals. Supporters argued the state needs better visibility into permitting delays and whether statutory deadlines are realistic; they also noted the bill had passed the House on a voice vote with no debate. Adam Crapo of the Department of Environmental Services said DES is generally supportive of the reporting concept but warned that the agency’s data are spread across many separate, partly manual databases. He said DES can already do this for some land resources permits through its new system, but not across all of its more than 90 permit types without additional help. DES estimated it would need two part-time positions to compile the reports, especially for waste management and water programs, and said otherwise existing permitting staff would have to do the work, potentially slowing permit processing. He also said the agency is already working to simplify rules and move more permits onto a new online platform, but could not meet the bill’s 2026 reporting deadline with current staffing and systems. Committee members questioned whether delays are often caused by incomplete applications rather than agency inaction, and Crapo said that is frequently the case. He said DES already tracks timelines to some extent for management and statutory compliance, but not at the individual-permit detail the bill would require. He also said some letters and records are captured in One Stop, but not all are. Members expressed support for the bill’s transparency goals while also worrying about added workload and possible slowdowns. The discussion then moved to DOT, where Susan Clawson said DOT is neutral on the bill because it recently implemented Salesforce and now has good data for reporting; DOT’s fiscal note reflects software-related costs, but the agency can already track the required information in its system.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up several liquor-related bills. Senate Bill 24, allowing students under 21 to taste wine in educational settings, drew no opposition or amendment and was reported out 6-0. Senate Bill 79, authorizing self-pour automated systems under the liquor commission, also faced no opposition and was voted ought to pass 6-0. Senate Bill 80, shifting licensing, auditing, and enforcement for wholesale and retail e-cigarette sales to the liquor commission, prompted discussion about whether the change would add cost; members heard that the liquor commission already handles similar enforcement and that the change was meant to address nonreporting. It was voted ought to pass 6-0. The committee then discussed Senate Bill 87, concerning alcohol service in salons, barbershops, and spas. Members and staff focused on how to limit the amount served, whether to require recordkeeping, and privacy concerns about tracking what patrons drank. The discussion settled on removing references to alcohol type and quantity and keeping only patron records, with the understanding that the agency would set the details by rule. The bill was not formally amended at the meeting, but members agreed an amendment would be drafted for the following week; the bill itself was reported ought to pass with that amendment to be determined. Finally, the committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 245, the EMS No Surprises Act and System Stabilization Act. The sponsor, Senator Suprena, said the bill would prohibit balance billing for emergency ambulance calls and unscheduled transfers, while setting reimbursement at either locally set public rates or 325% of Medicare. She explained that the proposal was based on national work on ground ambulance billing and was intended to stabilize struggling EMS providers. Committee members sought clarification that the bill did not eliminate balance billing for non-emergency transfers, and the sponsor confirmed it did not. A second witness, Jerry Stringham, testified in support, citing his reimbursement background.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Family Court Subcommittee of the Children and Family Law Committee convened under Chairman Mark Pearson to continue work begun by the prior special committee on the family division of circuit court. Pearson emphasized a collaborative, consensus-based approach with the judiciary and said the subcommittee would build on earlier “low-hanging fruit” reforms while tracking how prior changes are actually working. He also explained that the subcommittee would likely form smaller working groups, with informal meetings allowed so long as they stayed within open-meeting limits. The main policy focus was House Bill 652, which was retained by the committee, along with broader questions about what additional changes family court should make. Members divided the work into two broad areas: pre-trial and trial issues. Pre-trial topics included alternative dispute resolution, mediation training and supervision, counseling/therapy for litigants with issues such as PTSD, and improving materials for pro se litigants, including New Hampshire Bar forms and instructions. The committee also discussed whether to use input from prior testimony, former litigants, other states, and legislative researchers, and whether some of the work should be assigned to two-person subgroups to allow flexible research and outreach. For trial-related issues, members identified additional training for family court judges, whether judges should be dedicated solely to family court, and how to handle the overlap between civil and criminal matters, especially domestic violence and divorce cases. Representative Raymond raised concerns about courtroom recordings and whether judges’ behavior and record preservation were adequate; Aaron Kan of the court system responded that circuit court recording practices and staffing had not changed, that circuit court lacks the court monitors used in superior court, and that resource limits prevent similar staffing. Raymond also raised the cost of obtaining trial transcripts for pro se litigants; Kan explained that transcripts are produced by private vendors because the court system no longer employs court reporters, and that the fees reflect that outsourced service rather than a court-imposed markup. No votes were taken, and the meeting ended with plans to continue gathering information and assigning subtopics for further study.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Environment and Agriculture Committee met in executive session on SB 302, a bill requiring background checks for solid waste facility owners. The chair announced a staffing change, noting Representative Comtois was no longer vice chair and Representative Barber would serve in that role. The chair then explained that the committee had before it an amendment incorporating Senator Pearl’s updated language and additional technical changes requested by DEES Director Whimsat for FBI background-check requirements, and a separate amendment offered by Representative Patenza that would add language from the budget bill relating to a site evaluation committee, moratorium provisions, and harms-and-benefits language. Representative Patenza argued that the governor’s solid waste and site evaluation language had been developed over years with the committee, the governor’s office, and DEES, and should be moved into a standalone bill so it would not be lost if the budget failed. She said she had been told by Senator Roseford that the budget language would be placed into a separate House bill, and several members supported having a standalone vehicle as a backup. Representative Bixby, Haskins, Gruber, and others said they favored keeping the work alive in a separate bill, while Representative Scully said he disliked non-germane amendments and would vote only for the base bill and the chair’s amendment. Representative Barber asked for clarification on why the amendment was considered non-germane, and the chair and Representative Patenza explained that the budget-related policy had not had a separate public hearing. Members discussed legislative procedure, including whether the committee should recess to allow a hearing on the non-germane amendment and then return to act on SB 302. After discussion, the committee took a show of hands and overwhelmingly favored recessing the executive session to Tuesday, May 13 at 10:00 a.m. in LOB room 301-303, so a separate hearing could be held on Representative Patenza’s amendment before further action on SB 302.