Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up an insurance-related chronic pain bill and an amendment modeled on language from Massachusetts and Maine. The sponsor explained the amendment was developed after stakeholder meetings because the original bill would have created an unaffordable insurance mandate in New Hampshire. The amendment was intended to improve access to non-opioid therapies by limiting prior authorization and step-therapy barriers so they are not more restrictive than for other treatments, including opioid therapies. After questions, the committee took a straw vote and advanced the amendment. The next item was a department-sponsored bill involving the state’s all-payer claims database. Insurance Department officials explained that the bill would encourage self-funded employer plans to opt in voluntarily by giving them aggregated, deidentified claims information in return. They said self-funded plans cannot be required to report data because of federal law, but the bill would provide an incentive while protecting employee privacy. Members asked detailed questions about who would see the data, whether individual employees could be identified, and how privacy would be enforced; the department said access would be aggregated and deidentified, and employer privacy issues would be governed by ERISA and the U.S. Department of Labor. The committee also discussed a glucose-monitoring bill. Members debated whether the bill was aimed at type 1 diabetes coverage or broader access to continuous glucose monitors, and whether it would amount to an unnecessary insurance mandate that could raise premiums. Department testimony estimated the equipment cost and said the annual impact per member would be modest, but also noted that non-insulin therapies have not consistently shown clinically significant A1C reductions. The chair and some members emphasized that the bill should be considered on its own terms as a CGM coverage issue, not as a general diabetes mandate. The committee discussed the bill’s cost implications and asked the department for any prior cost analysis.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and then moved into a work session on its remaining bills. The main discussion centered on House Bill 477, which would establish a commission to study safety and security procedures at the New Hampshire State House. Members debated whether a new commission was needed, with several speakers arguing that security is already being reviewed through the bipartisan Joint Facilities Committee and existing security staff, including an outside consultant’s review. Others raised concerns that members do not always know how to report safety or behavioral issues and suggested better communication to the full membership about who to contact and what information can be shared. The House clerk then explained the structure and authority of the Joint Facilities Committee under RSA 17-E, noting that it is a bipartisan legislative committee made up only of elected officials, with publicly listed members, defined duties, and the ability to meet in nonpublic session on sensitive matters such as security. The clerk said members can bring concerns to the committee, its chair, or their caucus leadership, and that some safety briefings are already given to all members when appropriate. Several members said they preferred keeping security matters limited to a need-to-know basis and opposed creating a new commission that could force public discussion of sensitive procedures. The committee then voted on HB 477. Representative Sheen moved ITL, Representative Turkot seconded, and the motion passed 12-0, with Representative Wall voting no. The bill was sent to consent. After that, the committee began discussion of House Bill 314, which would prohibit the use of federal, state, or local funds for lobbying activities, but the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting focused on school governance and a proposed shift in responsibilities related to SAU consolidation, with committee members first discussing how school board members and other local officials would be selected for future testimony. The main presentation came from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals, whose executive director Brady Belair and several principals argued that mandatory statewide administrative consolidation should be approached cautiously and that any consolidation should be voluntary and locally driven. They said anticipated savings may not materialize, citing possible higher personnel, transportation, and technology costs, and warned that forcing changes could create disruption without improving student outcomes. Principals testified that their jobs are already broad and demanding, centered on instructional leadership, student safety, staff supervision, family communication, and day-to-day crisis response. Kathleen Murphy of Amherst described working 60 to 70 hours a week and said principals spend substantial time coaching teachers, handling student issues, and supporting school climate; she said adding more administrative duties would compromise student learning and teacher growth. Adam Osborne of Bow Memorial School similarly described principals as daily problem-solvers who set school-level direction and create conditions for schools to thrive. The witnesses also emphasized that principals, superintendents, school boards, and business administrators have different training and responsibilities, and that specialized tasks such as special education compliance, FERPA/HIPAA issues, and labor matters require appropriate expertise. Committee members questioned the witnesses about overlap between superintendent and principal duties, the completeness of statutory responsibility lists, and whether some functions such as curriculum, discipline, hiring, and evaluation are shared. The principals acknowledged some overlap and collaboration, but said superintendents typically handle broader system-level, legal, and central-office responsibilities while principals focus on building-level leadership and teacher support. One member raised the earlier expectation that districts might move to a principal-plus-business-manager model, but the witnesses said that model did not develop as expected and that district structures vary widely. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met to hear from the New Hampshire Association of School Principals as part of its review of a proposal involving statewide administrative consolidation and changes to school governance. Members first discussed how school board witnesses would be selected, with the chair saying the committee would seek a mix of district sizes and structures and would also accept emailed input. The principals’ association said it represents more than 550 principals and assistant principals and urged caution about any mandatory consolidation, arguing that successful consolidations are gradual and voluntary. Association leaders and principals testified that principals already handle a wide range of responsibilities, including instructional leadership, student discipline, safety, staff supervision and evaluation, family and community engagement, and day-to-day crisis response. They argued that shifting more legal, budgetary, and administrative duties onto principals would reduce time for coaching teachers and supporting students, increase burnout and turnover, and create legal and training risks, especially in areas such as special education, privacy, and labor issues. They also said the roles of superintendents, principals, and school board members are distinct and require different training and expertise. Members asked detailed questions about how responsibilities are divided between principals and SAUs, whether principals recruit and evaluate staff, and how much time principals work. One principal said she works about 60 to 70 hours a week and that additional duties would be difficult to absorb. Another principal described his school’s structure, the importance of community building, and the need to preserve district-wide alignment if consolidation moves forward. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 155, which drew a lengthy debate over an amendment to delay implementation until tax year 2027. Supporters said the delay would give lawmakers time to see whether projected revenues materialize and to reconsider the policy if needed; opponents argued it would reduce money available to services and local governments at a time of tightening revenues. Members also discussed broader revenue trends, including tobacco, rooms-and-meals, real estate transfer, and lottery revenues, and disagreed over whether tax cuts tend to increase revenue. The committee adopted amendment 2025-2983H on an 11-9 vote, then voted 11-9 to report HB 155 ought to pass as amended. The bill was sent to the consent calendar, with a majority and minority report to be filed. The committee then considered HB 224, with members expressing concern that the bill would redirect money collected for one purpose to another and should receive more study. A motion for interim study was made and seconded, and the committee approved interim study unanimously, 20-0, sending HB 224 to the consent calendar. Next, the committee took up SB 83, which the Lottery described as a vehicle for technical corrections to gaming law. The Lottery requested changes to remove a bond cap, reconcile inconsistent free-play/promotional-play language, redirect problem-gambling funds to the Commission on Addiction Treatment and Prevention, and revise background-check language after the FBI declined to conduct checks under the existing wording. The committee adopted amendment 2025-2984 unanimously, 20-0, then voted 20-0 to report SB 83 ought to pass as amended and placed it on the consent calendar. Finally, the committee began work on HB 524, a bill to repeal the New Hampshire Vaccine Association. Representative Yuli said members had received many emails and calls both supporting and opposing the program and that he had questions about transparency and the dollars involved. The transcript cuts off before any vote or further action on HB 524.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened by approving the September 5, 2025 minutes, with one member asking that future minutes use honorifics such as Mr. or Ms. The agenda was then adjusted so Police Standards and Training could present first. Director John Skipa reported on the 2019 performance audit, saying 12 of 16 findings were fully resolved and the remaining items were substantially or partially resolved. He highlighted work on a job task analysis to update curriculum and develop a more realistic physical aptitude test, including possible replacement of the long-used Cooper test and a shift away from mandatory baton training toward electronic weapons training. He said stakeholder work groups would meet in October and November, with a goal of completing the work by the first quarter of 2026. On the strategic planning and performance measurement finding, Skipa said the agency had relied on the 2019 audit and the LEAC report as guides while also implementing a digital records system. He acknowledged that a formal forward-looking strategic plan with the council had not yet been completed, but said he and the council chair wanted to do so, possibly through a retreat-style planning session. Members asked how many LEAC recommendations had been fully implemented; Skipa said he did not know the exact number but believed nearly all of the 22 items assigned to his agency were complete. On the administrative rules finding, he said a part-time former director had been brought back to help revise outdated rules, the council subcommittee had finished its work, and proposed changes would be sent to the full council, then to stakeholders and the public, with a public hearing expected and implementation targeted for 2026. For the Corrections Advisory Committee finding, Skipa said the committee had been reconvened in 2020 and 2021 but had limited usefulness because the statutorily named members were mostly high-level administrators rather than line supervisors or newer corrections staff. He said some positions later went unfilled because of budget and staffing issues, and the committee had not been called back, but he was open to either informal adjustments or possible legislative changes to make the committee more useful. Committee members suggested that the statute may need to be amended to allow more appropriate designees or supervisors to participate. After Police Standards and Training concluded, the committee moved on to the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification, where the executive director said he would focus on the partially resolved items in the dental examiner audit and the National Path audit, noting that many changes were tied to recent statutory revisions.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a work session on 17 retained bills and moved through several measures, often with motions to ought to pass or inexpedient to legislate. House Bill 54, allowing alternative treatment centers to operate for profit, was supported as a way to improve efficiency and potentially lower costs for medical cannabis users, and it was recommended OTP by a 9-0 vote. House Bill 97, an appropriation for wastewater infrastructure, drew mixed views: supporters said the Senate’s reduced funding still met the bill’s intent, while opponents argued the funding was inadequate for critical infrastructure needs; the committee voted 5-4 to ITL. House Bill 111, extending the Right to Know Ombudsman and exempting certain assistance from unauthorized practice of law, was recommended ITL 9-0. House Bill 197, concerning state payment of a portion of local retirement contributions, was discussed as a recurring issue; members noted an amendment could fund it starting in fiscal 2027, but the committee ultimately voted 5-4 to recommend the bill itself rather than ITL. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a harms-and-benefits report, was amended to narrow its scope to future privately owned landfills only; the amendment and the bill as amended both passed 9-0. House Bill 216, on workers’ compensation credit toward retirement service, was ITL’d 9-0 after the sponsor said the proposal was too open-ended and could affect unknown numbers of people.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 525, which would have transferred administration of the program for the deaf and hard of hearing and the related board to OPLC. The chair said the sponsor was no longer interested in moving forward, and Representative Schmidt moved ITL. The motion passed 14-0 with two members absent, and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. The committee then considered Senate Bill 182 on the maternal mortality review committee. The chair described a narrower amendment that would keep the name change, clarify operations so recommendations are returned to the appropriate entities, and expand contact with family members and close contacts, while dropping a proposed addition of a Department of Corrections member. The amendment was adopted unanimously, and the bill was then moved ITL and placed on the consent calendar. Senate Bill 185, dealing with OPLC investigations and backlog reduction, received an update from OPLC General Counsel Nicholas Fry. He described efforts to improve public communication, clear the complaint backlog, standardize intake and expert review, add automated responses and website updates, use weekly legal-viability reviews, create preliminary investigation protocols, and establish a process for law-enforcement referrals. Members asked about board involvement and criminal-conviction cases; Fry said boards are kept informed and that such matters can proceed either through complaints or application/background-check processes. Representative Groa requested a follow-up update in January, and the committee agreed to an oral report then if needed. The bill was then voted ITL unanimously and placed on the consent calendar. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 349 on optometrists performing ophthalmologic laser procedures. Dr. Angelique Sawyer testified in support, saying the amendment adds more specific proctoring and qualification requirements, based on language requested after earlier hearings, and that similar systems exist in other states. Representative Sers confirmed that the new sections were the key additions, while Representative Schmidt said he remained open to the concept but wanted a thorough review and asked about a subcommittee. The discussion was still ongoing when the transcript ended, with no vote recorded on HB 349.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee Subcommittee on Adequacy and Funding Sources opened its second meeting by reviewing four retained bills assigned to it: HB 651, HB 772, HB 491, and HB 734. The chair said the goal was to compare the bills across the board, consider whether any one of them should be the committee’s recommended vehicle, and then vote on a recommendation to the full committee. He noted the bills would move out before November 21 and be taken up on the House floor in January, while related LSRs were also being developed for the coming session. Representative Ames argued that HB 651 should be the main vehicle because it would substantially raise the adequacy base and adjust differential aid categories to better reflect real school costs, including poverty, special education, and English learner needs. He described the bill as building on court guidance and said the current funding formula is far below actual district needs. He also supported HB 491 as a study vehicle to examine revenue options, saying the legislature needs informed choices about how to pay for the changes. Representative Damon strongly backed HB 651 and HB 491, citing constitutional obligations, the Conval and Rand rulings, and large projected funding increases for districts such as Claremont, Windham, and communities in the chair’s district if HB 651 had passed earlier. Representative Fellows said he has an LSR similar to HB 491 that would study existing and new revenue options using criteria such as revenue potential, administrative cost, affected groups, implementation timeline, and implementation cost, with input from revenue administration and outside agencies. Representative Papich Muller emphasized constitutional separation-of-powers concerns, reading Article 83 and saying he was not comfortable with the broad claim that “cherish” clearly mandates a specific spending level, though he said he intends to follow Supreme Court guidance. Representative Ricky read testimony from a local school board member arguing that the state already imposes many mandates on schools while providing the least funding in the country, and that HB 651 would help restore meaningful local control. No final vote or action was taken in the portion provided, though the chair had indicated the subcommittee would vote before adjournment.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The discussion was largely a closing reflection on the committee’s relationship with the judiciary. Members emphasized that they preferred to work collaboratively and “compare and contrast” the current approach with earlier, more adversarial efforts. The speaker argued that cooperation with the judiciary had produced better results, while antagonism in other contexts, such as the DCYF special committee, had not led to meaningful change. The committee noted that its liaison to the judiciary had moved on, and that a replacement would be filled. Judge Kristo was mentioned as part of the transition, and the speaker said the judiciary still wanted to maintain the same collaborative working relationship going forward. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken in the portion provided.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee held a work session on HB 313, a bill dealing with non-public sessions and when a person discussed in such a session should be notified or allowed to request that the meeting be open. The chair opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and invited public comment before committee discussion. The main public testimony came from Phil Jaru, who described a personal dispute with local officials and said the bill should ensure people are notified when they are being discussed in closed session and can request an open meeting. He also argued for limits on non-public sessions, saying they should not be used for matters outside the board’s authority or for what he characterized as gossip, while also trying to avoid interfering with investigations. Committee members focused on the practical and legal problems with the proposal. Several members questioned whether a person should have a right to attend, to demand an open meeting, or simply to receive notice, and whether that right should apply before the meeting or only once the discussion begins. Members raised concerns about situations involving multiple people, children, victims, or other confidentiality interests, and whether a request to open the meeting could conflict when one person wants openness and another wants privacy. One member suggested the bill may be too broad and proposed narrowing it to simple advance notification, possibly by email, rather than an automatic right to open the meeting. The discussion also touched on existing law governing non-public sessions, including the narrow “reputation” exception and Supreme Court cases interpreting it. Members noted that the current statute already limits non-public discussion to the matters stated in the motion, and some suggested that if the concern is boards using non-public sessions for unrelated discussion, that issue may be better addressed by clarifying the existing statute rather than expanding the bill. No vote or final action was taken; the committee appeared to continue working through possible amendments and whether the bill should be narrowed to notification or a right to attend rather than a right to force the meeting open.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 518 and House Bill 652FN, both related to the family court system and child/family matters. HB 518 drew extended discussion about DCYF/DCYF’s role and whether the bill should be retained, amended, or studied further. Representative Love argued the agency is deeply troubled, citing abuse cases, lack of training, and fear among constituents, and said he would vote against ITL while preferring interim study so the bill could still be used as a future amendment vehicle. Other members emphasized that the family division has ongoing reform work underway and that abolishing or moving cases to superior court would not solve the underlying problems. On HB 652FN, the subcommittee chair and Representative Pearson gave a detailed defense of the family division, explaining its history, statewide structure, caseload, and the rationale for specialized family courts. Pearson said the bill would reverse progress by shifting jurisdiction back to superior court, overload dockets, and deprive families of judges with specialized expertise. He pointed to reforms already underway, including simplified forms, more mediation, and review of possible judicial bias patterns. Several members and public comments supported keeping the bill as a tool for reform rather than killing it, while critics argued the family court system suffers from due process, oversight, and rule-of-law problems. The committee also heard broader testimony on family court concerns, including allegations of systemic bias, discovery limits, unsworn witnesses, and lack of oversight, as well as support for mediation as a less adversarial and more effective option. Some members said the judiciary needs more judges and mediators, but that budget constraints limit those improvements. The discussion ended with no final vote recorded in the excerpt; instead, members continued debating whether the bills should be ITL’d or retained for interim study and further reform work.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission held an organizational meeting under SB 57 to study the cost of special education, with the meeting streamed publicly at the chair’s request. Members introduced themselves, and the chair explained that the bill creates two separate pieces, one dealing with SAU structure and the other with a commission on special education costing. He outlined his background in education and special education and said the commission’s work would focus on understanding and controlling special education costs. The commission reviewed its membership requirements and noted several vacancies or unfilled appointments, including the special education advocate, two governor-appointed parent advocates, and a Department of Health and Human Services representative. The members then elected Representative Rick Ladd as chair, Representative Dick Ames as vice chair, and Representative Megan Murray as clerk. Representative Ames briefly described his legal and policy background in disability and special education work in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The chair then walked through the commission’s study topics, including referral rates by IDEA category, reasons for increases in categories such as autism and other health impairment, post-COVID referral trends, pre-referral interventions, Medicaid and 504-related costs, out-of-district placements, dispute resolution, billing practices, privacy, reimbursement, legal services, graduation rates, attendance, and adult learning. Members discussed how special education costs are distributed, noting that the state spends about $977 million annually on special education, with only part covered by state aid and the remainder largely borne by local districts. Testimony also noted that out-of-district placement costs have risen sharply since rate-setting changes around 2018, and that some categories may reflect changes in identification practices, medical factors, or broader population shifts. The commission agreed to continue reviewing the data and formulas in future meetings.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Long Range Capital Planning and Utilization Committee met and approved the minutes from June 30, 2025. There was no old business. The committee then heard a series of New Hampshire Department of Transportation requests involving the sale or disposal of state-owned land and easements, including an access point sale in Exeter, land sales in Keene, Guilford, Lincoln, Conway, Chesterfield, Fremont, Belmont, and a utility easement in Albany. Most items were direct sales to abutters or towns, with conditions such as obtaining local and state approvals, commissioning boundary surveys, and paying administrative fees; each of these items was approved by motion and vote. One Guilford parcel was amended to reflect a smaller surveyed area and reduced appraised value before approval. The committee also approved a permanent access easement for a single-family residence on Route 153 in support of the Bickford property. The committee then considered a Department of Administrative Services item, presented as a substitution replacement, authorizing a perpetual utility line easement to Public Service Company of New Hampshire for a facility under construction on the Hampstead hospital property that will serve as the replacement facility for the Manchester senior center. The department requested waiver of the administrative fee because the easement was being granted in exchange for utility service, and the committee approved the request. An informational item, LRCP25-038, was discussed regarding a reduction in fair market value due to a change in access; staff explained no committee action was required because the item was informational only. Additional informational materials from the New Hampshire Council on Resources and Development were received, including meeting minutes and surplus land review memorandums for Meredith and Hampstead. Before adjourning, the committee set its next meeting for December 9 at 9:30 a.m. at Granite Place, Room 228, noting the meeting would be on a Tuesday rather than Monday because of building scheduling. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn, which was seconded and approved.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Long Range Capital Planning and Utilization Committee met and first approved the June 30, 2025 meeting minutes. The committee then took up a series of Department of Transportation property actions, including authorization to grant an access point in Exeter, sell two small tracts in Keene, amend a prior Guilford disposal based on a revised survey and appraisal, sell 0.42 acres in Lincoln, list and sell 9.77 acres in Chesterfield, sell 0.54 acres in Fremont, and approve a permanent access easement in Belmont. The committee also approved a utility easement in Albany and a permanent access easement on Route 153 for the Bickfords. Most of these items involved direct sales or listings, administrative fees of $1,100, and conditions requiring surveys and local/state approvals; several were approved unanimously after brief or no questions. Representative Faulkner declared a conflict of interest on the Chesterfield item, and Representative Newman sat in for that matter; later, Faulkner was recused from the Belmont item as well. The committee also approved a Department of Administrative Services request to grant a perpetual utility line easement to Public Service Company of New Hampshire for a facility under construction at the Hampstead hospital property, with the administrative fee waived because the grant was in exchange for utility service. During discussion of informational item LRCP25-038, staff explained that no committee action was needed because the item was only to notify members that a parcel’s fair market value had been reduced due to a change in access. The committee received additional informational materials from the New Hampshire Council on Resources and Development, including minutes from its May 8 meeting and memorandums on surplus land review for Meredith and Hampstead. The next meeting was set for December 9 at 9:30 a.m. at Granite Place, Room 228, and the chair noted the meeting would be on a Tuesday because of building scheduling. The committee then adjourned.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee approved the previous meeting minutes and then reviewed a draft preliminary report on long-term managed care. The chair explained the report is intended to frame issues and outline legislative options, not make a final recommendation, especially given unresolved questions about the federal One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3). The report’s key issues included the current financing of county and private nursing homes through Medicaid rates, ProShare, MQUIP, and related funding mechanisms, and the concern that those payments could be affected or eliminated under a managed care model. Members also discussed managed care organizations’ role in Medicaid and cited other states’ experiences, noting examples of savings in Florida and Tennessee but higher costs in California. One member raised Indiana as another important comparison, and the committee agreed to add it to the report’s state examples. The committee also reviewed sections on dual eligibility, D-SNP, PACE, and CFI waivers. The chair raised concerns about whether OB3 creates incentives for states to move toward D-SNP and whether federal changes could affect provider taxes, state-directed payments, and intergovernmental transfers. Henry Litman, the state Medicaid director, said he would confirm details on D-SNP incentives and explained that ProShare is based on certified public expenditure rather than an IGT, while county cap financing is the relevant intergovernmental transfer issue. He said IGTs are not going away and that the main risk is whether current financing mechanisms could be preserved if the state later changed course. Members discussed the possibility of a waiver not being granted or renewed and the high fiscal impact that could have on counties and property taxes. The committee then discussed the population that any long-term managed care model should cover. Members agreed that there is no appetite to move developmental disability or acquired brain disorder populations into long-term managed care at this time, and the chair changed the report’s terminology from “elderly” to “aging population.” The chair also noted that the status quo option should reflect the recent shift toward home and community-based services and reduced nursing home utilization since earlier county reports. The report’s four policy options were summarized as: maintain the status quo; pursue D-SNP for dual eligibles, with DHHS potentially submitting an application as early as 2027; adopt an HCBS carveout; or move fully to managed care for the aging population. No final policy recommendation was made, and the committee discussed making edits to the draft before circulation, including adding Indiana, clarifying OB3-related issues, and changing the report title from “final” to “preliminary” or “interim.”

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its June 30 meeting and then considered Capital Project 2515, a request from the Pease Development Authority Division of Ports and Harbors to spend up to $125,000 from the Harbor Dredging and Pier Maintenance Fund to replace a deteriorated 99-foot floating dock at Rye Harbor. Acting Director Richard Hartley said the dock is used for passenger loading and unloading for charters and whale-watching tours and is in poor condition. Representative Edgar moved approval, Representative Wiler seconded, and the motion carried. The committee then received several informational items, including quarterly and maintenance reports from the Department of Administrative Services, the Community College System of New Hampshire, and the Pease Development Authority. It also heard a presentation from the Department of Health and Human Services on Capital Project 2516, the Beneficiary Service Improvement project supporting closed-loop referrals and related systems. DHHS described the project as a mix of Medicaid enterprise functions and New Hampshire Care Connections tools, including provider modules, third-party liability, event notifications, and closed-loop referrals to connect health and human service providers. Officials said the project is largely federally funded, with capital funds representing only part of the overall effort. Members asked about the accounting breakdown, prior committee review, provider participation, patient experience, and public response. Representative Burr questioned whether the project had been fully presented previously and raised concerns about the scope and necessity of the $8 million effort; DHHS responded that earlier work was discussed in other committees and that the current presentation covered only capital funds. Senator Waters asked about user response and patient experience, and DHHS said feedback has been generally positive but the system is still in design and implementation. In response to questions about participation, DHHS said 84 providers are currently on the network and clarified that a “provider” generally means an individual organization or health system, not each individual clinician. The committee also set its next meeting for December 9 at 9:00 a.m. at Granite Place, Room 228, and then adjourned.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division 3 work session opened with routine announcements, including new and absent members, a tribute to former chair Rep. Jess Edwards, and an explanation that Division 3 is advisory and will make recommendations to full Finance. Chair Mooney also distributed a self-created index to the budget binder and reviewed the committee’s options under House Rule 45. Members discussed scheduling a future visit to the Veterans Home in Tilton, with several October dates unavailable, and the chair said she would circulate possible dates. The committee also reviewed the second-year budget context and sources of funding, including surplus monies, existing and new revenue streams, grants, reappropriations, and the rainy day fund. The committee then took up several retained bills and repeatedly heard that their substance had already been addressed in the budget. House Bill 519, funding the Waypoint Youth and Young Adult Shelter, was moved ITL and passed 10-0. House Bill 547, county reimbursement funds, was also moved ITL and passed 10-0 after members noted the reimbursement had been included in HB 2. House Bill 570, repealing the prescription drug affordability board, was moved ITL and passed 10-0, with minority members saying they still believed the board had value but acknowledging the repeal had already occurred in HB 2. House Bill 704, concerning caregiver respite and senior volunteer programs, received the most discussion. Mr. Ripple explained that most items were already funded or suspended in the budget, leaving only the senior volunteer grant program unfunded. Chair Mooney offered amendment 2963H to fund the RSVP program at $180,000 for one year, contingent on surplus funds, and DHHS witnesses explained that RSVP is a federally funded AmeriCorps program that would be added to existing state licensing structures. The amendment was adopted unanimously, and the bill was reported ought to pass as amended on a 10-0 vote. The committee then heard House Bill 751, which would require licensure of outpatient substance use disorder treatment facilities and create an ombudsman-related complaint process. DHHS witnesses said the bill had been narrowed substantially from an earlier certification model with multiple positions and IT costs to a licensing model using existing department infrastructure, reducing the fiscal note to $211,000 for one position. They also said the ombudsman section was no longer needed because licensed facilities would fall under existing oversight. Members questioned how many facilities exist and whether licensing fees would cover costs; DHHS said it did not know the full provider landscape and that licensing revenue across the board does not cover the department’s costs. Rep. Daniels then proposed amendment 2964H to form a study committee because of the remaining questions and lack of a clear revenue stream, and the committee was still discussing that amendment when the transcript ended.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met to review tax expenditures, elect a chair and clerk, and hear updates on two credits due for periodic review: the career and technical education (CTE) center tax credit and the research and development (R&D) tax credit. Members first organized the meeting, then heard from Jennifer Ramsey of DRA, who explained the purpose of the tax expenditure review process and summarized the CTE and R&D credits. She said the CTE credit allows donations to CTE centers for a credit against business profits tax, is capped at 25% of a taxpayer’s liability, has a $500,000 aggregate limit, and was extended in SB 98 to fiscal year 2031. She also noted DRA could not provide detailed financial data because of statistical disclosure limits when too few taxpayers claim the credit. Committee members pressed for more historical and aggregate information, arguing they needed numbers to judge whether the credit is effective and worth continuing. The committee then heard from Chrissy Vanderhook of the Department of Education on the CTE credit. She described New Hampshire’s CTE system as serving 26 secondary centers and seven post-secondary centers, with industry partners providing internships, work-based learning, equipment, employee time, and other in-kind support that can qualify for the credit. She said the department reports annually to legislative leaders and that fiscal year 2025 credit activity was down about 48% from FY24, partly due to staffing changes and outreach issues. Members asked whether the program extends to community college-level programs, and she said it can, though she was not sure how broadly it is used that way. The committee also discussed a new Granite Patron of the Arts credit, which DRA said went into effect July 1 and is included in the tax expenditure report even though it is not yet listed in the statute. For the R&D credit, Ramsey explained that it offsets business profits tax and can carry forward to business enterprise tax, is based on incremental research spending, and currently has a $7 million annual aggregate cap. She said the cap has not yet been reached but could require proration as early as fiscal year 2026 if not increased. She noted there were 271 taxpayers claiming the credit in fiscal 2024 and that a proposal last session to raise the cap to $10 million and increase the per-company limit did not advance. Mark Liberty of BEA said the credit is an important recruitment and retention tool, especially for life sciences, aerospace, defense, and advanced manufacturing, but acknowledged BEA does not track direct revenue return. Andrea Hchvaria of New Hampshire Life Sciences argued the R&D credit is critical for startups and cited growth in applicants from 71 in 2008 to 248 in 2024, with qualified wages rising substantially over that period. Committee members repeatedly asked for more objective economic-impact data, but DRA said it only tracks who claimed the credit and the amount claimed, not broader business outcomes.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first approved the draft minutes of its May 16, 2025 meeting, with one correction removing Representative Dry from the attendance list because she was present as a guest rather than an appointed member. The committee then received a Department of Health and Human Services update from Commissioner Lori Weaver, who focused on the rural health transformation grant process. She said the department has been gathering stakeholder input since July, issued a request for information on September 22, and is working toward an end-of-October draft and a November 3 deadline, with a grant writer request expected to go before Governor and Council at no cost to the state. The bulk of the meeting centered on federal changes affecting SNAP and Medicaid. Karen Heert explained that the federal law changes commonly referred to as the “Big Beautiful Bill” or HR1 will affect SNAP eligibility and state costs, including a shift in administrative cost sharing from 50/50 to 75/25 beginning in October 2026 and a possible state share of benefits if New Hampshire’s error rate is too high. She said the program affects about 43,000 households, that New Hampshire’s federal fiscal year 2024 error rate was 7.57% versus a national rate of 10.93%, and that the state must get below 6% to avoid liability. She also said DHS is preparing remediation steps, auditing cases, and seeking technology and staffing support, including a grant for automation and training. Henry Litman then described Medicaid changes under HB2 and the new federal law. He said New Hampshire returned to pre-pandemic eligibility verification rules on July 1, including a 10% income compatibility standard and reduced ex parte renewals, which has increased manual work and contributed to a drop in enrollment from about 185,000 in late June to about 178,000 in early September. He also reviewed new child premiums, pharmacy copays, Granite Advantage premiums, and possible Medicaid work requirements, noting that DHS is working with CMS on implementation details and may use a state plan option rather than an 1115 waiver because it would be less expensive and faster. Members asked several questions about the SNAP error-rate rules, the distinction between administrative and client errors, the effect of unpaid copays, and the timing and legal risk of the Medicaid work requirement; no votes were taken on those policy issues.