Transcript Highlights:

• Get my notebook out in case there are questions I need to follow up with. That's it for now? Okay.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from the University System of New Hampshire chancellor on the system’s budget, enrollment, finances, workforce role, and response to federal policy changes. The chancellor said the governor’s recommended budget would reduce university system funding by about $16.5 million over the biennium, or roughly 8.3%, and asked that state funding be held at the governor’s level. She described planned cost reductions already underway, including lower headcount, reduced benefits and retirement contributions, property sales, and lease reductions, and said the system expects to remove about $20 million from its cost structure in fiscal year 2026. A large portion of the discussion focused on enrollment and finances. The chancellor said fall 2024 enrollment was about 23,000, with New Hampshire enrollment increasing for the first time since 2013, and noted that the system remains a major workforce pipeline, with about 3,000 graduates entering the state workforce each year. She explained that net tuition has fallen over time because of declining enrollment and increased financial aid, while research grants and contracts have grown significantly. She also walked through endowment funding, explaining that payouts are based on a 12-quarter rolling average and are intentionally smoothed to reduce volatility; members asked for follow-up information on payout comparisons, administrative salaries, headcounts, and compensation per student. Members questioned the university about the relationship between state support, tuition, endowments, and research spending. The chancellor said the system has used state capital support to leverage major investments, including the UNH Life Sciences building, Plymouth’s Hyde Hall, and the Olson Advanced Manufacturing Center, and described partnerships with businesses such as Lonza and regional manufacturers. She also explained a long-running New Hampshire 529-related revenue stream that has built endowment support for scholarships, and said the system’s endowment now totals about $988 million. In response to questions about possible cuts, she said the system is considering academic program sharing, consolidation of specialties, online delivery, AI-assisted administrative efficiencies, and footprint reductions, but declined to name specific programs. The committee also discussed DEI-related issues and federal grants. The chancellor said the system is reviewing executive orders and a U.S. Department of Education Dear Colleague letter, and that general counsel is working through websites, programs, and more than 1,200 federal grants to ensure compliance. She said the system spends about $3 million on what it calls DEI-related offices and services, but emphasized that these services include disability support, veteran support, Title IX, ADA, and employment-law compliance, and that the system does not have race-based programs, separate housing, or separate graduation ceremonies. She reported that the system had received stop-work orders on four federal grants totaling about $700,000 and warned that reductions in federal direct or indirect costs could affect research, jobs, and innovation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I kept a notebook on my desk to cover when my memory failed me.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• information, both immigrant and otherwise, was being handwritten by agents on scraps of paper or various notebooks

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The hearing of the Minnesota Senate Select Subcommittee on Federal Impacts on Minnesotans and Economic Stability focused on federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota, especially ICE and CBP operations, and their alleged constitutional and civil-rights impacts. Opening remarks from both parties emphasized the need for calm, cooperation, and public safety, though they sharply differed on the causes of the current situation. Republican members argued that violent criminal undocumented immigrants should be removed and that state and local officials should cooperate with federal authorities. Senator McEwen and other Democrats described the federal presence as abusive and terrorizing, citing deaths, family separations, and community fear, and called for accountability and truth-telling. The chair also held a moment of silence for Renee Mlin Good and Alex Prey before testimony began. Testimony from the ACLU of Minnesota and the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota described what they said was a large-scale federal enforcement operation, including Operation Metro Surge, with widespread alleged violations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Tenth, and other constitutional amendments. Witnesses cited alleged racial profiling, warrantless arrests, excessive force, denial of counsel, detention out of state, and failure to comply with court orders. They referenced specific cases involving Susan Tinure, Abdi Khadir Nure, Victor Manuel Diaz, and others, as well as reports of journalists and community members being threatened or detained while documenting ICE activity. The witnesses also said the federal government’s lack of transparency makes it difficult to know how many people have been detained or deported and argued that the harm extends to both immigrants and citizens. Committee members asked questions about ICE entering homes without judicial warrants, federal claims about constitutional limits, and access to counsel for detainees moved out of state. The witnesses said that out-of-state detention, poor locator systems, paid phone access, and lack of privacy make legal representation difficult or impossible, and that civil-rights remedies often come too late because people are removed before cases are resolved. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the committee moved from opening statements into testimony and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Very important, um, and for anyone who has a notebook and wants three-hole punch, there's one in the

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee heard testimony on House Bill 71, which would bar public elementary and secondary schools and higher education facilities from being used as shelters for certain non-citizens, with a stated exception for short-term emergency sheltering of up to 72 hours and for community-wide emergency use. Prime sponsor Rep. Juliet Harvey-Bolia said the bill was modeled on federal and out-of-state proposals and was prompted by examples in New York and Massachusetts where schools or other facilities were used as shelters, causing disruption. She argued the bill does not truly “ban” anything, but instead places a condition on receipt of state funds, and said the fiscal note’s projected loss of federal funding was unsupported and should have been described as undeterminable. Committee members questioned the bill’s scope and practical effects, including whether it would apply to vacant school-owned buildings, schools used during summer, charter schools, and situations where other states send people without advance notice. Harvey-Bolia said vacant buildings not functioning as schools would not be covered, and that the bill would still allow short-term emergency sheltering and community-wide use during weather events. She also said the bill would not prevent remote learning, and that its purpose was to avoid displacing students. Several members pressed her on the fiscal note and whether any federal or state program would actually be at risk; she said she found no evidence that funding would be lost and that DHHS had not identified a real threat. A witness from the New Hampshire Association of School Administrators, Jerry FW, raised practical concerns about who would determine eligibility at a shelter site, how the 72-hour limit would be enforced, and whether the bill would apply to charter schools. He also noted that remote learning is no longer an option in New Hampshire, making one of the bill’s stated concerns less relevant. The discussion also included clarification of the terms “refugee” and “asylum seeker,” with members and the sponsor debating the distinction and whether refugees are vetted. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um, obviously I'm a sub, and I've usually been given a notebook of all of the bills.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on HB 584, which would bar New Hampshire and its political subdivisions from enforcing mandates, orders, or similar directives from the World Health Organization, United Nations, or World Economic Forum. Prime sponsor Representative Green described the bill as a sovereignty measure and offered an amendment to clarify language, including replacing a reference to entities that “create and enforce policies” with language covering enforcement of policies, mandates, orders, requirements, edicts, or directives. Supporters argued the bill was a preemptive safeguard against outside influence and cited concerns about pandemic-era public health measures and international organizations. Opponents, including the American Heart Association, warned it could chill local policymaking and limit the ability of communities to use outside research or guidance. The chair closed the hearing on HB 584 after testimony concluded. The committee then moved to HB 580-FN, relative to retaliatory defamation in domestic violence and sexual violence cases. Representative Anita Burroughs, the prime sponsor, said the bill is intended to protect people who report sexual assault, sexual harassment, abuse, or domestic violence from retaliatory defamation suits, so long as statements are made in good faith and without malice. She also said the bill preserves the ability of accused persons to defend their names. Burroughs explained that the proposal was prompted by a survivor’s experience and was meant to address the chilling effect of expensive litigation on reporting misconduct. Testimony on HB 580 was generally supportive. Witnesses said the bill would help survivors speak out without fear of meritless lawsuits and described retaliatory defamation as a tool used to silence or intimidate accusers. Burroughs noted the bill was informed by anti-SLAPP principles and referenced high-profile defamation cases as examples of the cost and pressure of litigation. No vote was taken in the portion of the transcript provided; the hearing on HB 580 was opened and testimony began.

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony there had been a lot of examples about levels of distracted driving and using a phone and a notebook

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Transportation Committee opened its public hearing with HB 249, sponsored by Representative Seth Miller, which would allow bicycles, human-powered vehicles, and electric bicycles to treat stop signs as yield signs and red lights as stop signs in certain situations. Miller argued the bill would improve cyclist safety and traffic flow at no cost to the state, citing Idaho and Delaware as examples where similar laws were associated with fewer injuries and crashes. He emphasized that the proposal would remain optional for cyclists, who would still be required to yield to cross traffic and obey right-of-way rules, and said the bill is intended to help riders maintain momentum and avoid the instability that comes from repeatedly starting from a full stop. Committee members raised concerns about uncertainty for drivers and pedestrians, liability, and whether the bill would create a special class of road users with different rules. Representative Crawford asked about the red-light left turn language, and Miller explained it was included because bicycles may not trigger some traffic signals. Representative Hill questioned how other road users would know what a cyclist intended to do at an intersection, and Representative Gon noted the bill did not appear to address liability the way some motorcycle-related laws do. Miller responded that cyclists would still be expected to yield appropriately and said he would be open to an amendment if liability language was needed. Representative Emble also questioned whether the bill would create a special vehicle class, and Miller replied that bicycles already have different roadway rules and that the bill was meant to improve safety and flow. Several supporters testified in favor of the bill. Michael Frank, a cyclist and League cycling instructor from Spofford, said he regularly rides a cargo bike for errands and that stopping fully at intersections leaves him exposed longer and makes it harder to restart on hills. He said the bill would let cyclists slow, assess traffic, and proceed safely while maintaining momentum, and noted that he had not personally received a ticket for rolling through a stop sign, though he had been warned by police. Tim Blagden, former head of the Bike-Walk Alliance of New Hampshire, said the bill reflects how many people already ride, saves energy, and helps bicycles move through intersections faster and more safely. No vote or committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Or I can use a little notebook and I can keep track of where I put everything, and I can not have that

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I had notebooks of these wonderful sustainable methods, intensive rotational grazing plans.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met to hear House Bill 520, which would authorize the Department of Education to issue subpoenas in investigations and hearings involving the code of conduct for New Hampshire educators. Representative Lynn, the bill sponsor, said the measure was intended to give the department standard subpoena power during investigations and in later adjudicatory proceedings, with a process for challenging overbroad subpoenas. He argued that agencies with investigative and hearing authority should also have the power to compel witnesses and documents, and said the bill was narrowed from an earlier broader draft to focus on teacher credentialing and address concerns about scope. Members raised several concerns about whether the department already has enough authority, whether the Attorney General could handle subpoenas instead, and whether the bill creates an imbalance by giving subpoena power mainly to the investigating side. Representative Burroughs said she did not feel she had enough information and was uncomfortable with the bill, especially regarding who bears subpoena costs. Representative Biron questioned the trial analogy and whether both sides truly have equal subpoena rights. Lynn responded that the investigative stage is like a grand jury process, where only the investigating body subpoenas witnesses, while the adjudicatory stage allows both sides to seek subpoenas through the hearing officer. Other questions focused on the bill’s scope. Representative Andreos asked what investigative authority the Department of Education already has, and Representative Organ questioned why the bill is limited to educators rather than also covering vendors, charter school boards, or the EFA scholarship organization. Lynn said the limitation to educators was deliberate, because earlier broader versions drew objections for being too expansive. Representative Tur asked whether the Attorney General could already handle such matters, and Lynn said that while the AG might be able to pursue some investigations or court subpoenas, agencies should be able to conduct their own internal investigations. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.