Transcript Highlights:

• This bill contains language from HB 1189 that passed our committee and this House unanimously in March

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The conference committee first discussed HB 1099, which creates a committee to study private business providing special education services and local school district reimbursement. Members explained that the issue is broader than special education alone, involving residential placements, foster care, court-ordered placements, and questions about which entity pays for education and care costs when students are placed in residential facilities. The House proposed an amendment to expand the study to include students placed in residential facilities by school districts as well as those placed through episodes of treatment or court order, and members agreed the existing commission would not resolve the issue before its July 1, 2026 expiration. Representative Coker raised concern about the phrase “but not limited to,” but members said the broader language was needed to capture placements beyond the existing statutory categories. The committee then agreed to accede to the Senate version of HB 1099 with a committee amendment, and the House voted unanimously to adopt amendment 2026-1845H. The bill was placed on the consent calendar, and the meeting adjourned. The transcript also includes a separate conference committee discussion on HB 1807, concerning mandatory reporting to voters. The main dispute was how to present administrator compensation: the House favored total administrative cost, while the Senate initially preferred average administrator salary. Members debated whether voters would be better informed by totals or averages, and whether the bill should define “administrator” more clearly by reference to DOE rules. The committee reached a tentative compromise to add both an average administrator salary graph and a total administrator cost graph, define administrators by reference to ED 501.02(B), scale the graph more precisely, and list the top 10 highest-paid administrators plus any employee earning over $100,000. Both chambers then gave unanimous support to the revised approach, with the understanding that the draft would be finalized and signed later.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy met briefly without a quorum because many members were tied up in legislative committee of conference work. The chair said the committee would resume in June and, in the meantime, directed members to the committee webpage and the 2024 committee’s report and COVID-19 after-action report, which he said could be reviewed for possible updates and legislative recommendations on how New Hampshire should respond to future pandemics. The chair then introduced two recent articles as framing material: one about the U.S. Supreme Court declining to hear a challenge to the Los Angeles Unified School District’s COVID vaccine mandate, and another about CDC internal emails and alleged failure to publicly acknowledge vaccine safety signals. He argued these examples raised concerns about mandates, transparency, and the balance between individual rights and public health, and said the committee would revisit the issue in future meetings. Representative Pollazok thanked the chair for presenting both legal and medical perspectives and suggested the committee focus on reviewing scientific methodology and the quality of evidence behind competing claims. A member asked whether vaccine pamphlets now include risks and benefits, and the chair responded that FDA-approved products should have patient inserts available on the FDA website, including sections listing adverse events from clinical studies and commercial use. He said he would research and email the committee copies or excerpts. Members also discussed how to evaluate studies over different time periods, dosing levels, and the timing of side effects, as well as the difficulty of comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated outcomes when definitions change over time. Before adjourning, the chair said the committee would ask the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services how it would monitor and assess vaccine or pandemic-related issues in real time and whether additional structures would be needed in a future emergency. He said the committee would likely take July and August off, resume in September, and aim to have a draft report by mid-October and a final report by late October ahead of the November elections.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Conference Committee on House Bill 244 met to resolve remaining drafting issues in the bill updating and recodifying municipal enforcement of building and fire codes. The chair explained that the measure is largely a technical recodification, moving statutory references and correcting broken cross-references after review by the subcommittee, the Senate, AI-assisted checking, and the Building Code Review Board. Members emphasized that Amendment 2026-1923H contains no policy changes, only reference updates and language cleanup to ensure the bill points to the correct current RSA sections. The committee then discussed a few specific drafting questions, including a reference on page one and language on page two concerning the phrase “remove the prohibition on a building permit.” Some members questioned whether that wording should instead describe a variance or exception, but the chair and Representative Darji explained that the language is intended to allow an applicant to return to the zoning board to remove a prohibition attached to a specific building permit, not to broadly eliminate the underlying rule. The committee also noted a corrected reference to current statutory language because the underlying law had changed since the bill was introduced. After the explanation, the House receded from its position of non-concurrence and concurred with the Senate amendment as further amended by 2026-1923H. Members agreed to place the measure on the House consent calendar, and the committee adjourned.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 751 reviewed amendment 2026-1904H page by page, focusing on open enrollment rules, capacity definitions, statewide enrollment limits, denial criteria, transportation, and funding. Members discussed clarifying that districts may set capacity at zero if they truly have no room, creating a statewide enrollment cap of 500 that can increase by 25% if it reaches 90% utilization, and exempting seats already used by open enrollment students before October 1, 2026. They also discussed how the Department of Education would allocate seats through rulemaking, while local districts would still set capacity, with grandfathered seats preserved where districts already allow open enrollment. A substantial portion of the meeting centered on when districts may deny open enrollment applications. The amendment would allow denials for reasons such as chronic absenteeism or disciplinary history, while requiring districts to consider whether those issues are tied to disability, McKinney-Vento status, foster care, or bullying. Members emphasized that such factors are to be considered, not used as the sole basis for rejection, and noted that the bill separately prohibits receiving schools from accepting or rejecting applicants based on pupil needs, special education needs, disability, aptitude, or athletic achievement. There was also discussion of whether interdistrict transfers should count toward open enrollment capacity, with a suggestion that a carve-out may be needed. The committee also reviewed provisions on program-specific capacity, continuous enrollment, and transportation. It was explained that capacity can apply to a school, grade, program, or class, including CTE programs, and that students may be denied if a specific program is full or if they do not meet prerequisites. The group clarified that open enrollment pupils would maintain continuous enrollment without reapplying, though there was concern about how that would work if district capacity changes over time. Transportation would generally be the parent’s responsibility unless required by an IEP or 504 plan, though students may use an existing bus route if seats are available and the receiving district allows it. On funding, the committee noted that the amendment changes the earlier HB 751 approach and instead ties open enrollment funding to base adequacy, differentiated aid, and an additional grant modeled on charter school funding, with dates removed at the department’s request. Members also raised concerns about how open enrollment would interact with existing tuition agreements and whether districts could use the new pathway to alter or pressure those arrangements. Department staff said districts would still be required to maintain a school of record and provide an adequate education free of charge outside the open enrollment program, and that if open enrollment enrollment became unusually large relative to district adequacy enrollment, the issue could be brought to the state board. No votes were taken in the portion provided.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The commission on the costing of special education met to review several documents and updates, including draft materials on residential placements, an LBA dispute resolution report, prior minutes, rate-setting rules, and a letter involving Senator Hassan. The minutes from March 16 were approved by motion, second, and one abstention. Members also received an update that the LBA special education performance audit is still pending; the report is expected to be very large, NHED and the Board of Education must review and comment before release, and it likely will not be available until late summer or early fall. The separate EFA audit was also noted as still unreleased, and members said they may return later to issues involving EFA costing and differentiated aid. A major focus was HB 1099, which would create a committee to study the cost and liability of providing educational services to students placed in residential facilities. The chair explained that the House version had passed unanimously and the bill was headed to a committee of conference. Members discussed a proposed amendment to add the phrase “including but not limited to” so the study would cover not only court-ordered or treatment-related placements but also other residential placements, including those tied to school district decisions. Some members said this was a substantial expansion, while others said it would simply give the committee broader latitude. Jason Stock of the Winnisquam Regional School Board described how the issue arose during budget work at Winnisquam, where the district was trying to determine who should pay for educational services for students living at Spaulding Youth Center in Northfield. He said the district had 10 students attending Winnisquam, including three foster students and seven students connected to Spaulding, and that Spaulding-specific invoicing for 2024-2025 totaled $141,417.05 for eight students. Members also discussed rising private placement tuition costs and the difficulty of determining residency and fiscal responsibility for students placed in residential settings. Department counsel explained that under RSA 193:27 and 193:28, children placed in a home for children may attend the local district school, and that special education cost responsibility depends on whether the student is identified as disabled and on the nature of the placement. Spaulding representatives had not yet presented by the end of the excerpt, and the committee was still working through the residency and funding questions.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Joint Fiscal Committee met on May 15 at 10:00 a.m. and first approved the April 17 minutes. It then took up a consent calendar covering tabs three through seven, with items 089 and 097 removed for separate discussion. The committee approved the remainder of the consent calendar and then adopted item 089, which involved Department of Safety/Homeland Security grant funding for active shooter incident management and school reunification training. Officials said the project is a mandatory Homeland Security grant set-aside, with training for public safety officials and school districts and internal social media used only to promote training schedules; members asked about marketing, outcomes, and how success would be measured. The committee next considered item 097 for the Division of Historical Resources. Agency officials said the request was driven by a decade-long increase in Section 106 and state historic preservation reviews, many tied to disaster-related infrastructure work such as culvert and road repairs, and that the grant would add capacity to handle roughly 1,000 to 1,500 reviews per year. The committee approved the item after brief discussion. Under the regular calendar, the Department of Transportation presented a fuel-related transfer. Members questioned the decline in the highway fund balance, which staff said was being affected by rising expenses, flat-to-moderate revenue, and a rough winter that increased maintenance costs. DOT officials said they were considering toll rate increases and noted the agency pays market wholesale fuel rates; they also discussed prior fuel hedging decisions and said they have authority to hedge again if it makes sense. The committee approved the DOT item, then approved a miscellaneous action item to fill a position at the LBA. Members also asked the chair to remind the Attorney General to appear at a future meeting regarding the YDC claims report. The committee set its next meeting for Friday, June 19 at 11:00 a.m., and adjourned after a brief note of appreciation for recent corrections and changes reported by the liquor commission.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, approving the minutes and consent calendar, then moved to the regular calendar of administrative rules. Department of Energy rule 25-220 was postponed until June at the sponsor’s request so stakeholders would have more time to review revised language. Several Department of Health and Human Services Medicaid-related rules were then considered, including 25-240, 25-265, and 26-33, each of which drew staff comments mainly about expired rule provisions and the agencies’ reliance on federal law, the Medicaid state plan, or other manuals. The committee approved those rules after brief questions, with the agencies stating they were already operating under the relevant federal or state-plan authority and, in one case, that rulemaking was underway to update an expired citation. The most extended discussion was on HHS Bureau of Aging rule 25-304, which had an amended conditional approval request. Staff explained the amendments clarified how case management agencies accept or deny cases, how telehealth participation is evaluated, and that the department sets the timing for accepting or denying cases under its existing authority. Staff also noted a separate issue about whether reimbursement rates must be in rule, but said the agency had long interpreted the statute to allow its approach and that any change would likely require legislation rather than committee objection. A provider representative testified against parts of the rule, arguing the case management agencies should not be required to accept referrals before contacting the participant, that telehealth decisions for other providers should remain with those providers, and that the quality-management section was duplicative and burdensome. Committee members questioned whether the telehealth language merely allowed case managers to say a service fit the client’s plan or instead gave them authority over another provider’s delivery method. The agency responded that case managers may determine what services an individual needs, but should not control how another licensed provider delivers those services. The discussion continued with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting opened with roll call, confirmation of a quorum, and approval of the April 6 and May 4 minutes, with minor corrections noted to the May minutes. The main presentation came from JD of Link Network, introduced by Dan Cohen, who described Link’s work with crypto.com and other market participants on tokenized money market funds and real-time settlement for institutional clients. JD gave a detailed history of his earlier work developing the Arca U.S. Treasury Fund and ArCoin, emphasizing that the project was built within existing SEC and 1940 Act frameworks and was intended to use blockchain technology for a traditional asset rather than create a crypto product. He said the effort involved years of discussions with the SEC, multiple custodians, and partners such as U.S. Bank, T-Zero Securities, and Tassat, and that the model eventually led to Link’s settlement system. He highlighted concerns that shaped the design, including regulatory compliance, privacy for institutional users, and the need to bridge traditional banking hours with 24/7 digital asset markets. The presentation also described Link’s features, including segregated and bankruptcy-remote fund structures, tokenized deposit and treasury fund settlement, and “yield in transit,” which allows interest to accrue and be distributed daily down to a two-second block. JD said the platform is being expanded for use cases such as exchange liquidity, cross-border capital movement, off-exchange collateral, stablecoin bridging, treasury management, and peer-to-peer settlement. He closed by posing policy questions for the commission about the use cases for stablecoins versus tokenized money market funds in New Hampshire and whether the state could issue or administer a security-based program with appropriate compliance controls.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy for New Hampshire held its first organizational meeting. The chair read the committee’s updated mission statement, which says the bipartisan committee will fact-find on the state’s COVID-19 response and its impact on the healthcare system, with focus areas including federal guidance, federal funds, emergency use authorization vaccination efforts, long COVID, the Patient Bill of Rights, and vaccination policies. The chair also announced committee staffing changes: Linda McGrath stepped down as vice chair and Representative Gerard was named vice chair; Representative DeRoy was named clerk. The chair emphasized the committee’s work is intended to be science-based and fact-finding, not anti-vaccine, and noted that the committee may issue follow-up reports and recommendations. Members discussed a broad list of topics for future hearings, including long COVID treatment, ongoing vaccination policies, reporting of COVID deaths, standards of care and provider discretion, COVID-related funding such as ESSER/CARES Act money, and communication of treatment developments during the pandemic. Representative Pollina argued the committee should examine specific treatments and outcomes, including remdesivir, oxygen/intubation practices, and ivermectin, and raised concerns about whether some treatments were harmful or suppressed. He also focused on pediatric vaccination policy, saying the committee should review New Hampshire’s recommendations for children and medical students, and questioned the state’s reliance on federal guidance versus independent review. The chair responded that shifting federal positions may justify an independent New Hampshire evaluation and asked him to gather more information and potential witnesses. In open discussion, members suggested additional witnesses and topics, including local funeral directors, nursing homes, and emergency medical services, as well as how nursing homes were affected by positive tests and admission restrictions. Another member suggested the committee consider what products it should produce, such as a final report, possible bill recommendations, and better documentation or footnotes tying findings to testimony and scientific sources. The chair said the committee’s deliverables could include reports, letters to department heads or legislative leaders, and other actions, and noted that the committee’s 2024 report and supporting documents are available on the House committee page. No votes or formal actions beyond the organizational appointments were taken.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Keywords: 1189, house, all