Transcript Highlights:

• :49:02.000><c> think</c><00:49:02.240><c> will</c><00:49:02.960><c> uh</c><00:49:03.119><c> help</c><
• this<00:49:03.760><c> bill</c><00:49:03.920><c> the</c><00:49:04.079><c> way</c><00:49:04.240><c> it
• 49:08.240><c> is</c><00:49:08.400><c> written</c><00:49:08.800><c> with</c><00:49:09.040><c> the</c><
• :49:18.079><c> uh</c><00:49:18.319><c> one</c><00:49:18.559><c> of</c><00:49:18.640><c> the</c><00:49
• societies.<00:49:39.119><c> So</c><00:49:39.280><c> that's</c><00:49:40.079><c> uh</c><00:49:40.400><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• at it, I go, well,<00:49:01.839><c> this</c><00:49:02.079><c> is</c><00:49:02.240><c> just</c><00:49
• Exactly.<00:49:22.720><c> I</c><00:49:23.119><c> think</c><00:49:23.720><c> what</c><00:49:24.720><c>
• </c><00:49:29.839><c> And</c><00:49:30.000><c> I</c><00:49:30.240><c> think</c><00:49:30.800><c> the<
• c><00:49:34.000><c> come</c><00:49:34.160><c> to</c><00:49:34.400><c> the</c><00:49:34.559><c> insurance
• Uh and<01:49:01.360><c> so</c><01:49:01.520><c> that's</c><01:49:01.760><c> what</c><01:49:01.920><c>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up the pooled risk management program bill and reviewed a new amendment drafted with input from the Insurance Department and Legislative Services. Department witnesses explained that the proposal would move oversight of pooled risk management programs from the Secretary of State’s office to the Insurance Department, add a licensure requirement, preserve the programs’ non-insurer status, and exempt them from third-party administrator licensure. They also described a series of solvency tools in the draft, including financial reporting, risk-based capital standards, minimum capitalization, investment limits, commissioner examination and enforcement authority, rulemaking authority, merger and affiliate-transaction review, confidentiality protections, and a separability clause. A major theme of the discussion was that pooled risk management programs differ from commercial insurers because the risk remains with the member local governments rather than being backed by a state guarantee fund. Witnesses said the bill is designed to emphasize solvency over return of premium and to give the Insurance Department a regulatory “toolbox” to prevent insolvency, including a proposed $5 million excess or stop-loss coverage benchmark, optional accessible policies, and a requirement that boards vote on dividends or premium returns when capital exceeds 600% of risk-based capital. Members questioned how this approach differed from the original Secretary of State bill and whether assessments on towns would still be possible; the department responded that the new framework would allow more flexible oversight and alternatives to immediate court action. The committee also discussed why the statute should continue to say the programs are not insurers, with the department explaining that this preserves their autonomy and avoids applying unrelated insurance laws and premium taxes. Members asked about the department’s workload and were told the department believed it could absorb the new duties without additional funding. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:24.640><c> um</c><00:49:26.000><c> uh</c><00:49:26.240><c> e-</c><00:49:26.480><c> pull</c
• I got way too<00:49:38.960><c> many</c><00:49:39.599><c> ideas</c><00:49:40.079><c> floating</c><00:49
• <00:49:43.760><c> had</c><00:49:44.079><c> a</c><00:49:44.480><c> dedicated</c><00:49:45.119><c> source
• > I</c><01:49:03.679><c> would</c><01:49:03.840><c> say</c><01:49:04.480><c> you</c><01:49:04.639><c>
• > be</c><01:49:09.760><c> over</c><01:49:10.000><c> a</c><01:49:10.400><c> four</c><01:49:10.560><c>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the uh,<00:49:07.599><c> the</c><00:49:07.839><c> fees,</c><00:49:08.160><c> the</c><00:49:08.319
• ><00:49:10.000><c> but</c><00:49:10.240><c> I'm</c><00:49:10.960><c> there's</c><00:49:11.280><c> a</
• </c><00:49:13.079><c> Um,</c><00:49:14.079><c> and</c><00:49:14.319><c> then</c><00:49:14.559><c> the
• And<00:49:22.319><c> I</c><00:49:22.480><c> want</c><00:49:22.559><c> to</c><00:49:22.720><c> remind<
• /c><00:49:26.480><c> the</c><00:49:27.280><c> fully</c><00:49:27.520><c> insured</c><00:49:27.920><c>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> tell</c><00:49:01.640><c> you</c><00:49:02.520><c> that</c><00:49:02.880><c> at</c><00:49:03.160
• > ask</c><00:49:16.040><c> me</c><00:49:16.160><c> to</c><00:49:16.720><c> it</c><00:49:16.839><c> is
• </c><00:49:18.559><c> to</c><00:49:18.799><c> I</c><00:49:18.920><c> get</c><00:49:19.040><c> to</c><
• :49:24.680><c> I</c><00:49:25.319><c> out</c><00:49:25.559><c> of</c><00:49:26.000><c> um</c><00:49:26.240
• the</c><00:49:41.319><c> industry</c><00:49:42.200><c> as</c><00:49:42.359><c> to</c><00:49:42.680><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on House Bill 271, which would remove the exam requirement for licensure as a Licensed Social Work Associate (LSWA). The chair and several members expressed reservations about repealing a requirement that was only created in 2021, arguing that licensure should include some measurable demonstration of competency and that it is too early to judge whether the current standard is working. Members also raised concerns about the social work compact and the lack of uniformity across states, saying that changing the requirement now could undermine the standards New Hampshire agreed to at the outset. Testimony in support of the bill argued that the LSWA exam is a barrier for applicants because the level is intended for people without formal social work education, and the exam is the same national exam used for licensed social workers. The witness said there is only one LSWA in New Hampshire, so there is little pass/fail data, but noted that the Association of Social Worker Boards reported 78% of its membership favored retaining the exam. Supporters also emphasized that LSWA holders complete 30 hours of training and extensive supervised hours, and that they are not intended to work independently. Opponents or skeptics questioned whether the exam is the right measure for this role and asked for data showing actual failures or barriers. The discussion turned to possible alternatives, including a different exam, a practical skills assessment, or broader rulemaking authority for the board to set LSWA criteria. One suggestion was to amend the law to give the board authority to develop appropriate standards in rulemaking, rather than naming a specific exam in statute. Members also discussed whether the board could create a more suitable assessment and noted that the current law requires a national proctored examination approved by the board, but there is no national exam specifically for LSWA. No final vote or action was taken in the excerpt, and the subcommittee indicated it would gather more information, including the existing rule language, before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• .<00:49:12.720><c> Would</c><00:49:12.880><c> Representative</c><00:49:13.280><c> Nor</c><00:49:13.440
• <00:49:28.559><c> integrity</c><00:49:28.960><c> there,</c><00:49:29.280><c> even</c><00:49:29.440><c
• ><c> spending</c><00:49:30.079><c> more</c><00:49:30.400><c> after</c><00:49:30.720><c> we</c><00:49:
• </c><00:49:39.359><c> Could</c><00:49:39.599><c> you</c><00:49:40.000><c> uh</c><00:49:40.319><c> you
• </c><00:49:41.839><c> why</c><00:49:42.079><c> we</c><00:49:42.240><c> go</c><00:49:42.400><c> from</

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> you're</c><00:49:03.400><c> talking</c><00:49:03.599><c> about</c><00:49:04.000><c> so</c><00:49
• :04.760><c> that</c><00:49:04.960><c> I</c><00:49:05.040><c> should</c><00:49:05.200><c> be</c><00:49
• ><c> that</c><00:49:07.480><c> I</c><00:49:07.599><c> should</c><00:49:07.760><c> be</c><00:49:07.880
• :49:21.720><c> under</c><00:49:21.960><c> this</c><00:49:22.119><c> bill</c><00:49:22.480><c> they</c
• wouldn't need<00:49:22.960><c> a</c><00:49:23.160><c> do</c><00:49:23.960><c> that</c><00:49:24.040><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first reviewed its schedule, noting that 13 bills were being executed the next day and that additional subcommittee work would be scheduled around Town Meeting Day and the following session days. The chair explained that the committee would not meet on Town Meeting Day, would handle the remaining bills on the next available subcommittee day, and would continue any unfinished items later in the month. The committee then took up House Bill 774, which concerned Medicare-related coverage issues. Members discussed the bill’s purpose and the differences between Medicare standard and Medicare Advantage, with one member saying the proposal was informative but did not offer a workable solution. The committee also moved to inexpedient to legislate on House Bill 185, and the motion passed on a 6-0 vote. House Bill 241, relating to alternatives to opioids, was retained for further work. Members said the bill raised concerns about insurers effectively practicing medicine and about the lack of evidence on the efficacy of some alternative treatments, while also noting that chiropractic coverage mandates already exist in statute. The committee voted to retain the bill, with the motion passing 6-0. The most extended discussion was on House Bill 648, which would expand insurance coverage for glucose monitoring. Testimony and committee comments focused on whether coverage should be tied to insulin use or instead to a physician’s medical judgment, the role of continuous glucose monitoring for people with type 2 diabetes who are not on insulin, and the potential cost impact. An insurance department fiscal analyst said the original $22-per-member estimate was based on the unamended bill and that the amended version would require updated analysis; members agreed to retain the bill to narrow the eligible population and revisit the language later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing<00:49:28.000><c> none,</c><00:49:28.319><c> absent</c><00:49:28.720><c> any</c><00:49:28.880><
• ><c> be</c><00:49:45.839><c> there</c><00:49:46.319><c> on</c><00:49:46.559><c> your</c><00:49:46.800
• And<00:49:47.839><c> still</c><00:49:48.160><c> on</c><00:49:48.480><c> 87</c><00:49:49.119><c> of</c
• ><c> note</c><00:49:53.280><c> is</c><00:49:53.599><c> that</c><00:49:53.839><c> we</c><00:49:54.559>
• </c><00:49:56.720><c> And</c><00:49:56.880><c> then</c><00:49:57.040><c> that's</c><00:49:57.359><c>

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:49:02.000><c> that</c><00:49:02.240><c> sort</c><00:49:02.400><c> of</c><00:49:02.480><c> fiscal<
• But<00:49:03.839><c> given</c><00:49:04.160><c> the</c><00:49:04.319><c> financial</c><00:49:04.640><
• </c><00:49:21.520><c> other</c><00:49:21.760><c> and</c><00:49:22.000><c> and</c><00:49:22.480><c> the
• <00:49:44.240><c> been</c><00:49:44.559><c> committed</c><00:49:45.119><c> at</c><00:49:45.440><c> a<
• 49:04.159><c> time</c><01:49:04.320><c> we</c><01:49:04.560><c> passed</c><01:49:04.800><c> this</c>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee’s higher education subcommittee met to discuss HB 443, HB 510, and related issues. The chair explained the subcommittee membership and noted that Representative Luno was absent and replaced by Representative Bricky, with other full committee members allowed to participate in discussion but not final votes. No votes were taken during this meeting, and the chair said final subcommittee recommendations would likely come in the first week of November. On HB 443, which concerns terms of appointment to the Higher Education Commission, the chair described the bill as intended to let the governor replace members who are not attending or no longer representing the appointing organization. He said the prior governor supported the idea, but the current governor’s office believes the bill is unnecessary because nonattendance or loss of representation would already amount to resignation or removal. Members raised questions about legal authority and whether the same principle should apply to other boards. The chair said he was leaning toward finding the bill not needed, but would continue discussion later. The committee then spent most of the meeting on HB 510, which would establish due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty at public higher education institutions and address collective bargaining issues. Supporters, including Representatives Papovich and Brown, argued the bill would provide clear, minimum protections, especially because campus rules are lengthy and vary by institution; Brown also suggested adding an independent ombudsman or representation for students. Opponents, including Representatives Burton and Bricky, said existing campus regulations already provide due process and that the bill could interfere with campus governance and collective bargaining. The chair and others discussed whether the bill’s definitions should be aligned with existing law to avoid confusion, and several members suggested using existing statutory definitions or cross-references. The chair also said the bill would apply only when disciplinary action is involved, not as a general challenge to DEI policies, though members referenced recent national examples involving DEI-related disputes as context.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> that</c><00:49:05.520><c> that</c><00:49:05.760><c> may</c><00:49:06.079><c> be</c><00:49:06.720
• I I think<00:49:15.119><c> to</c><00:49:15.359><c> the</c><00:49:15.920><c> point</c><00:49:16.160><c
• <00:49:18.160><c> made,</c><00:49:18.640><c> the</c><00:49:18.880><c> notion</c><00:49:19.200><c> of<
• </c><00:49:28.400><c> Um,</c><00:49:28.800><c> and</c><00:49:28.960><c> I</c><00:49:29.200><c> think<
• 00:49:32.960><c> we're</c><00:49:33.119><c> going</c><00:49:33.200><c> to</c><00:49:33.280><c> use</c

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:33.520><c> Two</c><00:49:33.680><c> of</c><00:49:33.760><c> these</c><00:49:33.920><c> will
• :49:37.200><c> engineer</c><00:49:37.599><c> and</c><00:49:37.839><c> one</c><00:49:38.079><c> is</c>
• Guard</c><00:49:42.400><c> to</c><00:49:42.559><c> make</c><00:49:42.640><c> sure</c><00:49:42.720><
• We want<01:49:11.760><c> every</c><01:49:12.480><c> employee</c><01:49:12.880><c> to</c><01:49:13.119
• 49:15.199><c> moment</c><01:49:15.360><c> they</c><01:49:15.600><c> step</c><01:49:15.840><c> foot</c

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> injured</c><00:49:11.880><c> that</c><00:49:12.079><c> of</c><00:49:12.240><c> course</c><00:49:
• </c><00:49:18.680><c> thought</c><00:49:19.000><c> to</c><00:49:19.240><c> have</c><00:49:19.400><c>
• :20.319><c> but</c><00:49:20.480><c> in</c><00:49:20.680><c> fact</c><00:49:21.160><c> has</c><00:49:
• ><c> child</c><00:49:27.200><c> is</c><00:49:27.480><c> placed</c><00:49:27.920><c> outside</c><00:49
• of the family<00:49:29.559><c> as</c><00:49:29.760><c> part</c><00:49:29.920><c> of</c><00:49:30.040

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Children and Family Law Committee opened its March 4 meeting with procedural announcements, including a deadline for any Minority Report, notice that the committee would not meet the following Tuesday because of town meeting day, and a preview of its March 18 agenda. The chair said that meeting would include hearings and executive sessions on HB 518, requiring DHHS to provide a detailed annual report of DCF costs, and HB 775, directing DHHS to seek proposals for supervised visitation centers; HB 553 was also slated for executive session. The committee also heard an update on Representative Grossman’s son, who remained in the PICU at Mass General. The main hearing was on HB 493, which would require child abuse and neglect education for physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants as a condition of licensure. Representative Alicia Gregg presented the bill and an amendment reducing the required training from two hours to one hour, saying the goal was to improve recognition of abuse and prevent both missed cases and false accusations. Cassandra Sanchez, the state Child Advocate, strongly supported the bill, describing a 2020 review of nine cases of non-ambulatory infants with serious injuries and later system mapping that identified gaps in medical recognition; she said the training should be part of existing continuing education hours and that voluntary uptake had been limited. Dr. Michael Matos of Wolfeboro Pediatrics also testified in support. Ben Bradley of the New Hampshire Hospital Association opposed legislating the requirement, saying hospitals already train staff and that the legislature should not single out one topic for statutory mandate when other reporting obligations are handled differently. In questioning, committee members asked whether the hour would be part of existing continuing education, whether hospitals already provide similar training, and whether the bill should be placed in the continuing medical education statute instead of child protection law. Bradley said hospital members already provide annual training and collaborate with proponents, but did not support putting the requirement in statute. Sanchez said the bill was intended to use one of the hours already required for training, though members noted that the bill text did not clearly say so. The committee also heard broader testimony about the Family Division of Circuit Court, including a proposal to create a subcommittee to study more difficult issues such as pre-trial counseling, evidentiary practices, and domestic violence-related cases, with the Speaker appointing members to that subcommittee.

Transcript Highlights:

• :00.920><c> so</c><01:49:01.760><c> if</c><01:49:01.920><c> they</c><01:49:02.040><c> don't</c><01:49
• to work<01:49:13.520><c> um</c><01:49:14.400><c> thank</c><01:49:14.560><c> you</c><01:49:14.760><c>
• </c><01:49:17.880><c> I</c><01:49:17.960><c> don't</c><01:49:18.119><c> know</c><01:49:18.280><c> how
• ><c> you</c><01:49:21.800><c> know</c><01:49:22.000><c> we</c><01:49:22.159><c> we</c><01:49:22.239><
• 49:29.680><c> um</c><04:49:29.798><c> a</c><04:49:29.878><c> few</c><04:49:30.040><c> years</c><04:49

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Transportation Committee held a public hearing on HB 249, which would allow bicycles, and in the bill’s language human-powered vehicles and e-bikes, to treat stop signs as yield signs and red lights as stop signs when safe. The bill sponsor, Rep. Seth Miller, said the measure is intended to 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 crashes or injuries. He emphasized that the bill would remain optional, would not let cyclists ignore cross traffic, and would help riders avoid the unstable “wobble” that comes from repeatedly stopping and starting, especially on cargo bikes or other heavier bicycles. Committee members raised concerns about predictability, liability, and whether the proposal creates a special class of vehicle. Rep. Crawford asked why the bill also addresses left turns on red for one-way streets; Miller said that provision is meant to address situations where bicycles do not trigger signal equipment and could otherwise be stranded at a light. Rep. Gannon questioned the lack of explicit liability language, and Miller said he did not know of a separate provision but would be open to an amendment if the committee wanted clearer language. Rep. Hill and Rep. Emble expressed concern that other drivers would not know what cyclists intend to do and that the bill could create special rules; Miller responded that cyclists would still be required to yield and that the law would not change right-of-way rules. Several witnesses testified in support. Michael Frank, a Spofford cyclist and League cycling instructor, said the bill would help him safely commute and carry heavy groceries by reducing the effort and exposure involved in restarting after a full stop. Tim Blagden, former head of the Bike Walk Alliance of New Hampshire, said the bill reflects how many people already ride, saves energy and time, and would still require cyclists to stop at red lights unless the intersection is clear. He also noted that traffic signals often do not detect bicycles. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:49:09.800><c> to</c><00:49:10.280><c> help</c><00:49:10.640><c> people</c><00:49:11.680><c> to
• We<00:49:17.400><c> don't</c><00:49:17.600><c> go</c><00:49:17.760><c> to</c><00:49:17.960><c> AA</c>
• <00:49:18.480><c> just</c><00:49:18.760><c> have</c><00:49:18.960><c> a</c><00:49:19.000><c> little</
• </c><00:49:20.280><c> and</c><00:49:20.400><c> share</c><00:49:20.640><c> around</c><00:49:21.120><c>
• You don't<00:49:26.240><c> quit</c><00:49:26.440><c> smoking</c><00:49:27.000><c> by</c><00:49:27.120

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:00.720><c> Seeing</c><00:49:01.040><c> none,</c><00:49:01.359><c> we'll</c><00:49:01.599><
• <00:49:06.640><c> due</c><00:49:06.960><c> to</c><00:49:07.280><c> start</c><00:49:08.079><c> at</c><
• :49:01.040><c> reserve</c><01:49:01.520><c> uh</c><01:49:01.600><c> they</c><01:49:01.760><c> took</c
• </c><01:49:12.960><c> all</c><01:49:13.119><c> I</c><01:49:13.199><c> was</c><01:49:13.440><c> the</c
• /c><01:49:21.119><c> low</c><01:49:21.360><c> as</c><01:49:21.440><c> we</c><01:49:21.600><c> can.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :33.680><c> break</c><00:49:33.920><c> it</c><00:49:34.079><c> out</c><00:49:35.040><c> in</c><00:49:
• know<00:49:40.240><c> they're</c><00:49:40.480><c> both</c><00:49:40.640><c> in</c><00:49:40.880><c>
• :49:42.720><c> this</c><00:49:42.960><c> is</c><00:49:43.040><c> the</c><00:49:43.200><c> cost</c><00
• <c> room</c><00:49:44.800><c> and</c><00:49:45.040><c> board</c><00:49:46.000><c> on</c><00:49:46.240
• :49:28.239><c> the</c><01:49:28.480><c> money</c><01:49:28.639><c> for</c><01:49:28.800><c> it.

Bills: HB0101, HB0062, HB0109

Keywords: guardianship, monitoring, ward protection, financial independence, case management, governmental claims, liability limits, inflation adjustment, public safety, local government insurance, property tax, tax exemption, homeowner, armed forces, residency requirement, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > seen</c><00:49:04.800><c> during</c><00:49:05.119><c> my</c><00:49:05.359><c> seven</c><00:49:05.680
• There<00:49:08.240><c> are</c><00:49:08.400><c> four</c><00:49:08.720><c> families</c><00:49:09.520><
• ><c> just</c><00:49:16.160><c> like</c><00:49:16.319><c> I</c><00:49:16.559><c> had</c><00:49:16.800>
• We<01:49:06.480><c> must</c><01:49:06.719><c> not</c><01:49:06.960><c> sit</c><01:49:07.199><c> back.
• /c><01:49:35.840><c> minute</c><01:49:36.080><c> to</c><01:49:36.159><c> revise</c><01:49:36.480><c>

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, December 4, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:03.799><c> depending</c><00:49:04.280><c> on</c><00:49:04.440><c> the</c><00:49:04.559><c>
• older<00:49:14.880><c> ones</c><00:49:15.200><c> that</c><00:49:15.440><c> have</c><00:49:15.680><c>
• 17.280><c> there</c><00:49:17.400><c> might</c><00:49:17.559><c> be</c><00:49:17.680><c> a</c><00:49:
• 00:49:23.000><c> so</c><00:49:23.280><c> if</c><00:49:23.599><c> if</c><00:49:23.760><c> the</c><00:49
• 00:49:27.200><c> way</c><00:49:27.359><c> I</c><00:49:27.480><c> do</c><00:49:27.799><c> and</c><00:49

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee opened by outlining hearing procedures, including a two-minute limit for live testimony, a request not to repeat written testimony, and a reminder about decorum. The first bill heard was SB 697, which would create a nonrefundable individual income tax credit for expenses to retrofit residences with wind-resistive devices. The Insurance Division said it supported the concept but noted it may need an appropriation or outside expertise to develop certification standards, while the Department of Taxation said the bill should retain a third-party certification requirement if the Insurance Division cannot administer the credit. The Hawaii Insurers Council supported the bill, and the Tax Foundation suggested a subsidy-style program would be more efficient than a tax credit and criticized the bill’s 100% credit structure. A testifier in support argued the measure would help homeowners fortify houses against hurricanes and reduce shelter demand; written testimony from several others, including HIEMA, was noted as supportive. The committee then moved through SB 76, which would require the Hawaii Property Insurance Association to provide commercial property coverage after two private-market denials, and SB 83, which would require insurers to give advance written premium-change notices and explanations to common-interest community policyholders and the insurance commissioner, along with a report on premium increases. For SB 76, the State Insurance Division stood on its written comments, and testimony in support came from Michael Honda, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, and Jessica Herzog. SB 83 drew more extensive discussion: the Insurance Division supported the need for better transparency, while the Hawaii Insurers Council opposed the bill, arguing that agents—not insurers—typically communicate with AOAO boards and that the measure could worsen an already difficult market. Insurance Division staff acknowledged widespread complaints from condo associations about lack of transparency and said the division had received many calls about premium increases and nonrenewals. The discussion on SB 83 expanded into broader concerns about condo insurance, nonrenewals, surplus lines, and the difficulty of getting timely explanations for large premium increases. Committee members and testifiers described older buildings struggling to fund repairs and upgrades while facing steep insurance costs, and some urged the committee to craft baseline statutory protections for unit owners. The Insurance Division said surplus lines serve a critical gap-filling role and warned against regulating that market in a way that could slow access to coverage. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:31.040><c> a</c><00:49:31.160><c> municipality</c><00:49:31.760><c> shall</c><00:49:32.040
• <00:49:38.079><c> of</c><00:49:38.200><c> a</c><00:49:38.599><c> uh</c><00:49:38.760><c> principal</c
• 00:49:46.280><c> are</c><00:49:46.440><c> not</c><00:49:46.599><c> going</c><00:49:46.720><c> to</c><
• a</c><00:49:48.920><c> family</c><00:49:49.200><c> member</c><00:49:49.559><c> I</c><00:49:49.640><c>
• :56.400><c> I</c><00:49:56.480><c> just</c><00:49:56.760><c> wanted</c><00:49:56.920><c> to</c><00:49

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:49:06.880><c> we</c><00:49:07.000><c> can</c><00:49:07.440><c> put</c><00:49:07.760><c> together</
• <00:49:10.559><c> or</c><00:49:10.880><c> estimates</c><00:49:11.440><c> on</c><00:49:11.680><c> what
• that we can't<00:49:24.000><c> estimate</c><00:49:24.559><c> that</c><00:49:24.839><c> in</c><00:49:
• to look at<00:49:32.960><c> I</c><00:49:33.160><c> just</c><00:49:33.559><c> I</c><00:49:33.720><c>
• just</c><00:49:33.920><c> find</c><00:49:34.480><c> that</c><00:49:35.480><c> we've</c><00:49:35.760>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all