Transcript Highlights:

• that would really be placing a great hardship on Minnesotans if they don't have access to the 20% reduction

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The houses that were fortified, as compared to the houses that weren't, showed a drastic reduction in

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up HB 297 with a non-germane amendment proposed by the Insurance Department to create the Granite State Home Mitigation and Resiliency Program. Commissioner DJ Beton explained that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce rising insurance premiums and avoid surplus lines coverage by funding proactive home and property improvements such as roof fortification, exterior and foundation work, flood protection, and tree removal. He said the proposal was developed after leadership asked for more statutory detail and for the idea to be vetted through policy committees rather than handled only in the budget process. Beton said the program would be funded by the first $1 million collected annually from the insurance premium tax, with grants of up to $10,000 awarded on a first-come, first-served basis. He described the program as modeled on similar efforts in other states, with means testing tied to the Department of Energy’s weatherization/home heating assistance criteria. He also said the department would administer the program using one existing staff position, with coordination through Treasury, and that unspent funds would roll over for several years before reverting to the general fund. Members asked about the unusual use of a non-germane amendment and how the bill would be handled procedurally, since the underlying bill and the new insurance proposal were unrelated. The chair explained that the amendment was being used as a vehicle to move the department’s proposal through the committee process and that the committee could later accept one part, both parts, or neither. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting shown; the discussion ended with questions about administration, staffing, and the relationship between the underlying bill and the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• asked whether the intent of this bill is simply to go after plastic bottles, or whether it is a reduction

Committee: House Resources, Recreation and Development

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It could simply be we see a huge spike in demand, or sometimes we see a reduction in the amount of supply

Committee: House Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• they're not always accurate on what they projected for the clean energy tax credits and the Inflation Reduction

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, June 26, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then I'll leave you with something that I was part of: that regulatory reduction task force, that

Committee: Joint Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• was that Austin had it for 17 years, non-PAH type, using asphalt, and there’s been no benefit or reduction

Committee: House Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 1281, which would establish standards and voluntary certification for agency-owned “facility comfort dogs” used by police and other public safety agencies. Representative Morton, the prime sponsor, said the bill is intended to create a consistent statewide framework because different departments currently use different policies. He emphasized that the bill is meant to distinguish comfort dogs from service animals, emotional support animals, and therapy dogs, and noted that a small amendment may be needed to make that distinction clearer. He also said the bill is timely under the ADA because comfort dogs fall outside service-animal protections, but still need training standards for public safety and consistency. Committee members questioned whether the bill was too detailed and whether the legislature should be setting rules on matters like training methods, diet, and breeding. Laura Barker of Hero Pups, who helped train New Hampshire’s first police comfort dog, supported the idea of a minimum standard but said the bill should be less prescriptive and should not interfere with therapy dogs or private handlers. She explained that comfort dogs vary in temperament and deployment needs, that raw diets raise zoonotic disease concerns, and that the program should remain voluntary and not cost the state money. Detective Michelle Jones of Portsmouth Police opposed the bill as written, saying the term “facility comfort dog” is confusing, the bill is overly restrictive, and some provisions go beyond what should be mandated by statute; she suggested a more flexible, guideline-based approach and noted that departments already have their own SOPs and can enforce them internally. Justin Brassen of the Manchester Police Department also testified, describing the history of comfort dog programs in New Hampshire and the work of a prior subcommittee formed through the governor’s commission on PTSD among first responders. He said there are currently no statewide standards and that the earlier study involved police, fire, EMS, dispatch, corrections, and NAMI New Hampshire, with the goal of creating a thoughtful work product. He agreed the bill needs work and answered questions about how departments handle training and public access. By the end of the hearing, members and witnesses discussed possible amendments, and one committee member suggested the bill may be better handled through interim study because of the amount of work still needed.

Committee: House Environment and Agriculture

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Committee: House Education Funding

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He's cut $169 million in funding for community safety and violence reduction programs.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, May 14, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But there is certainly a reduction on the UPT side, and an increase, or I should say increase in the

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Committee: House Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For LGDs, it would be a $150 fine and require a reduction in the number of dogs or the implementation

Committee: House Environment and Agriculture

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee held an open work session on HB 1766-FN, a bill addressing cruelty to livestock, and focused on proposed language changes from the Department of Agriculture. Assistant State Veterinarian Nathan Harvey, speaking for the commissioner, explained concerns about the term “imminent danger,” arguing that the bill should allow seizure based on probable cause when an animal is starving or has a life-threatening condition, rather than tying action too closely to whether the owner is arrested. The department also proposed language on “extreme suffering” that would require euthanasia if the cost of treatment would exceed the allowable reimbursement amount under AGR rules, though members immediately raised concerns about using a dollar limit to require euthanasia. The department further suggested clarifying who may participate in investigations by allowing the state veterinarian or a designate, and noted that the current draft could be read too narrowly. Members discussed the $5,000 emergency care cap in the rules, with Josh Marshall confirming it is an aggregate emergency veterinary care limit. Several legislators said they were uncomfortable changing the bill from “may” to “shall” euthanize, arguing that treatment costs vary widely by species and condition and that a fixed monetary threshold could be too rigid. Representative Bixby also raised a separate concern that the bill’s language may be broader than intended and could apply to all animals rather than livestock only. The department agreed the bill should be limited to livestock and suggested using existing statutory definitions or adding a new section to make that clear. The discussion also turned to humane societies and other organizations that might investigate complaints or board seized animals. A representative from a humane organization said the groups with expertise in care often also have expertise useful to investigations, and that removing them entirely could be impractical because only a few facilities in the state can provide boarding. Members and witnesses explored alternative language that would allow for-profit and nonprofit organizations to participate in either the investigation or the care of livestock, but not both, to avoid conflicts of interest while preserving needed expertise. No votes were taken; the work session ended with agreement to consult the Office of Legislative Services and the department to refine the bill before the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a 90% reduction in property tax.

Committee: House Municipal and County Government

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• contaminant levels or less, and to provide education to citizens and medical providers for harm reduction

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 199, which would extend the statute of limitations for civil actions seeking damages from PFAS contamination from six years to 20 years. The prime sponsor and other supporters argued that PFAS contamination in southern New Hampshire has long-term and often delayed health and property impacts, making the current six-year period too short for victims to discover harm, connect it to exposure, and seek relief. Supporters described contamination in places such as Merrimack and surrounding communities, cited health concerns including cancer, developmental issues, and other illnesses, and said a longer period would better preserve legal rights while still requiring proof of causation. The Department of Environmental Services said it was not taking a position but acknowledged the contamination and ongoing work to address it. The Business and Industry Association opposed the bill, arguing that evidence becomes stale over time, memories and documents fade, and a longer window would make it harder to determine causation when other exposures or intervening factors may be involved. Committee members questioned both sides about causation, the difficulty of proving PFAS-related illness, and whether a 20-year period was necessary if a plaintiff already knows of the injury and its source. Supporters responded that PFAS effects can emerge slowly, that scientific understanding continues to develop, and that current knowledge is still incomplete. Opponents said the existing discovery rule already starts the clock when harm and causal connection are known, and that extending the period would reduce clarity and fairness in litigation. After testimony and questions, the chair closed the hearing on HB 199. The committee then opened House Bill 268 FN, which was described as a technical measure to confirm that the Board of Tax and Land Appeals may hold hearings in its Concord hearing rooms. The sponsor indicated the bill reflects current practice and does not require additional facilities. With only one witness listed and no apparent opposition, the discussion was brief and focused on why the authorization should be placed in statute rather than left to practice.