Transcript Highlights:

• So I said, you know, go to DHHS, find out whoever is doing not necessarily product testing, but whatever
• So I said, you know, go to DHHS, find out whoever is doing not necessarily product testing, but whatever
• this<01:59:23.599> is<01:59:24.040> and<01:59:25.040> um<01:59:25.800> DHHS
• <01:59:26.800> was so that's where this is and um DHHS was so that's where this is and um
• DHHS was kind<01:59:27.320> enough<01:59:27.599> to<01:59:27.840> provide<01:59:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting covered two main items. First, the solid waste subcommittee reviewed draft language for HB 707, focusing on landfill siting and permitting standards. Members and the Department of Environmental Services discussed replacing repeated references to “aquifer” with “drinking water well,” clarifying that aquifer is a broad term, and considering whether a statutory definition was needed. They also debated the bill’s setback and time-of-travel provisions, including the 10^-5 standard, a 1,500-foot distance, and whether the bill should rely more on performance-based criteria than prescriptive distances. Another major topic was permit denial language tied to applicants with significant histories of repeated serious violations or landfill-related litigation; the department said it already has related authority in current rules, but noted some wording was still too vague and could be tightened. No vote was taken, and the chair closed the hearing with plans to continue work later. The second item was a work session on HB 424, which would direct the Department of Agriculture, Markets and Food to create forms for businesses to request information about service animals and establish a study committee on fraudulent or untrained service animals. Several members said the problem raised by the bill was real but expressed concern that the legislature may be limited by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. Others argued that a study committee would likely not produce a workable solution and might conflict with leadership’s direction to avoid unnecessary study committees. Members discussed whether the bill should be retained, amended, or instead replaced with a letter or resolution to the federal delegation. The committee appeared to lean toward ITL and possibly pursuing a letter to federal officials, but no final vote is reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• homelessness, but they're not, they don't have a preference because they're, you know, referred by DHHS
• preference because they're you know<01:31:44.880> referred<01:31:45.280> by<01:31:45.440> DHHS
• <01:31:46.040> and<01:31:46.199> avoiding know referred by DHHS and avoiding know referred
• by DHHS and avoiding nursing<01:31:46.800> home<01:31:47.080> care<01:31:47.320> or

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair then said, “I’d like to call Erica Davis and Michelle Roberge from DHHS food protection.” of
• 52:12.640> Michelle<03:52:13.080> Roberge<03:52:13.800> from<03:52:14.560> DHHS
• Davis and Michelle Roberge from DHHS Davis and Michelle Roberge from DHHS food protection<03:52:
• <04:22:13.319> uses<04:22:13.800> to more about the process that DHHS uses to more
• about the process that DHHS uses to determine<04:22:14.439> whether<04:22:14.640> or<04

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee opened by noting member absences and then reviewed the governor’s HB 2 trailer bill language creating a solid waste site evaluation committee. The chair explained that Finance would want the committee’s input on the proposal and also announced a temporary change to the committee’s schedule, with additional Wednesday meetings planned around school vacation. The committee then moved into a work session on several bills. On HB 150, Representative Ktoa offered a simple amendment changing food-processing language from “washed and rinsed” to “cleaned and sanitized” in the processing area. Members agreed the change better matched food safety practice, and the committee indicated support for advancing the bill. On HB 307, dealing with homestead food production areas, members discussed proposed amendment language that would add clearer sanitary requirements, including handwashing access, sanitary storage, sanitizable food-contact surfaces, and pest exclusion. The committee also discussed whether to replace “potentially hazardous food” with “time temperature control safe food,” but several members favored keeping the existing term because it is already well defined in food safety law. The bill was held for further amendment work rather than being executed immediately. The committee spent substantial time on solid waste legislation. For HB 479, members recalled a prior plan for a letter to the solid waste working group and agreed to proceed with the bill in executive session, with an offer of drafting help from Representative Bixby. For HB 77, which would require DES to establish site-specific setback distances for proposed new landfills, Representative Penza said his amendment was not ready yet but was close, and the bill was left for further discussion. The most detailed discussion was on HB 2115, which would require landfill permit applicants to submit a report on the project’s harms and benefits. Representative Germana explained an amendment that would replace section one, expand the list of benefits to include economic potential and infrastructure improvements, and set up a third-party review process in which the applicant submits a list of reviewers, DES screens the list, and the commissioner selects a reviewer if no agreement is reached within 60 days. Members asked about who could serve as contractors, whether they had to be local, and how DES would judge qualifications; the response was that environmental engineering and similar firms could be used, local or outside the community, and that the process would remain somewhat flexible. Representative H. Haskins asked whether the legislature or subcommittee would be formally notified of preliminary review problems, and the chair said no additional notification process would be built in beyond existing practice. The committee planned to continue work on the bills in upcoming executive sessions, including after school break.

Transcript Highlights:

• But DHHS is here. They might be able to clarify.
• But DHHS child. That's my understanding. But DHHS is<00:23:52.320> here.
• Uh, it's a year-long training program that DHHS is going to provide.
• Uh, it's a year-long training program that DHHS is going to provide.
• Uh, it's a year-long training program that DHHS is going to provide.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 34, which would require parental consent for each new service provided to a student through the Medicaid to Schools program and require reports to legislative policy committees. Senator Ruth Ward said the bill was intended to increase transparency, protect parental involvement, and ensure continuity of care, especially for students with disabilities. She also noted a proposed amendment she received shortly before the hearing that would change the bill’s focus from a “new service” to a “new care plan.” Representatives from the New Hampshire Primary Care Association and Amoscake Health testified that they opposed the bill as written but would support it with the amendment. They explained that tying consent to individual diagnosis codes or services could be burdensome, could delay care, and could create compliance problems if a diagnosis changes during a visit. They said the amendment would better align consent with the overall care plan and avoid interrupting treatment mid-appointment. Committee members raised questions about how the bill would interact with IEPs, individualized health plans, homebound services, telehealth, billing, and whether the amendment would still require parental involvement after a care plan changes. The deputy Medicaid director from the Department of Health and Human Services testified that the amendment was more operationally feasible because Medicaid billing involves many ICD-10 codes that can change or overlap, and consent should be tied to the care plan rather than to each code. He said the current law already requires parental consent for participation in the Medicaid to Schools program and annual consent for billing, but the bill would make explicit consent for care-plan changes. No vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided, and the committee appeared to continue discussion with DHHS after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• DHHS is the entity with the money for the actual purchasing of the vaccines, but the Vaccine Association
• > there<00:15:29.120> is<00:15:29.240> a<00:15:29.399> childhood on to DHHS
• there is a childhood on to DHHS there is a childhood vaccination<00:15:30.560> schedule<00:15
• the association has an extremely limited role in the vaccine purchase program, which is managed by DHHS
• All DHHS. All right, other questions? Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 233, which would impose transparency and reporting requirements on the New Hampshire Vaccine Association. The prime sponsor, Representative Comto, said the bill and a proposed amendment were intended to increase public access by requiring a physical meeting location, making meetings available online, and publishing a complete list of vaccines and pharmaceutical products purchased. She argued the association should be more transparent because it is involved in vaccine purchasing and public trust is important, especially given controversy around vaccines. Committee members questioned the sponsor about the association’s legal status, who sets vaccine requirements, whether other private entities would be covered, and whether the proposal should instead apply more broadly to all meetings or include recordings. The sponsor said the association was created by the legislature, that childhood vaccine requirements come from DHHS and CDC-related processes, and that she would be open to broader recording requirements. Some members raised concerns about misinformation and whether requiring answers to public questions could be problematic in a contentious policy area. Patrick Miller, executive director of the Vaccine Association, and attorney Mark McHugh testified in opposition. They described the association as a not-for-profit voluntary corporation created by statute in 2002 to serve as a funding mechanism for the state’s universal childhood vaccine purchase program, with no policymaking role and no public funding. They said the association already posts notices, agendas, minutes, and allows public webinar access and comments, while also providing annual audits and reports and other statutory reporting. They argued HB 233 would impose unnecessary administrative costs on a private entity, interfere with its limited charitable purpose, and ultimately increase costs borne by insurers, employers, and consumers. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Uh, Brian from DHHS. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, members of the committee.
• Any other questions for DHHS?
• Any other questions<01:29:59.679> for<01:29:59.840> DHHS? questions for DHHS?
• questions for DHHS?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• just this week—and I've been working with the University of Minnesota, who you will hear from about DHH
• just this week—and I've been working with the University of Minnesota, who you will hear from about DHH
• just this week—and I've been working with the University of Minnesota, who you will hear from about DHH
• just this week—and I've been working with the University of Minnesota, who you will hear from about DHH
• just this week—and I've been working with the University of Minnesota, who you will hear from about DHH

Bills: HF846, HF1538, HF1959

Keywords: education, special education, apprenticeship, funding, grants, intermediate school districts, teacher apprenticeship, registered apprenticeship, teacher licensure, teacher shortage, workforce development, education finance, K-12 education, higher education, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, Tier 3 license, teacher preparation, mentor teacher, school district

Transcript Highlights:

• >> I would like to invite our folks from DHHS food safety division to come up and give us their comments
• >> I would like to invite our folks from DHHS food safety division to come up and give us their comments
• > to<00:16:02.079> invite<00:16:02.800> uh I would like to invite our folks from DHHS

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a work session and then an executive session on HB 396, which would allow processing of beef cows, swine, sheep, and goats at facilities not certified by USDA. Representative Comtois presented a revised amendment after earlier drafting issues were corrected. She explained that the amendment now limits the amenable species language to cuts of meat rather than meat food products, fixes labeling language, removes an exemption from federal law, strikes a seasonal date range, and restores a section that had been removed. She also said the amendment distinguishes between amenable and non-amenable species and keeps a registration statement acknowledging the federal-law conflict. Committee members and witnesses debated the policy. Representative Howard questioned whether the bill should educate farmers rather than legislate them and raised concerns about requiring a farmer to register as violating federal law. Representative Comtois argued the bill supports small farmers, year-round meat processing, and intrastate activity, and described problems she said had occurred at USDA facilities. Representative Miner and others expressed support for moving the amendment forward. DHHS food safety officials testified that the department has no oversight of custom exempt facilities, that USDA is the only inspector in that system, and that if the bill passed there would be very limited regulatory oversight unless there were complaints or a foodborne outbreak. They also noted the original September 1 to April 30 date range had been tied to bison because of size and temperature concerns, and said the current language appeared to address bison, elk, and red deer documentation rather than the livestock species named in the bill. The New Hampshire Farm Bureau’s policy director, Rob Johnson, said the organization had recently voted down a policy opposing state regulations that would allow uninspected meat sales at retail until federal law changes, and that he needed to consult further with leadership before taking a position on HB 396. He suggested the bill should use the term “beef cattle” for consistency with livestock statutes. In executive session, Representative Comtois moved to approve amendment 2025-3090H, Representative King seconded, and members reiterated both support and reservations. The transcript ends during executive-session discussion, with no final recorded vote on the bill shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just for some context from DHHS, the most DCYF-placed children are served through state-licensed homes
• Um just for some context from<04:22:32.000> DHHS<04:22:32.960> the<04:22:33.439> most
• <04:22:33.760> DCYF<04:22:34.720> placed<04:22:35.439> children from DHHS the
• most DCYF placed children from DHHS the most DCYF placed children are<04:22:36.159> served<04
• All of that stuff remains but it DHHS.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, uh, one last question before we leave the budget summary page 13: the DHHS recoveries, how did
• :03:46.160> 13 summary page 13 summary page 13 um<03:03:48.399> the<03:03:48.600> DHHS
• <03:03:49.600> HS um the DHHS HS um the DHHS HS recoveries<03:03:52.720> how<03:03:
• Yeah, and I’ll just point out that a lot of the departments of the state, including DHHS and everywhere
• And I’ll just point out that a lot of the departments of the state, including DHHS and everywhere else

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 129, which would redefine “evidence-based” in public education. Department of Education testimony said the bill’s definition would conflict with the federal definition and be unusually restrictive, potentially affecting curriculum, educator training, and many existing state requirements. The department said it could force a broad overhaul of school programs and create a need for at least one new state position, with local districts likely facing significant unbudgeted costs. Members raised concerns about impacts on federal pass-through funding, curriculum materials, and whether the bill was workable at all. Several members said the proposal would be too costly and difficult to implement, especially during a tight budget cycle. Representative Papovich moved to retain HB 129, and the motion passed 7-0. Members who supported retention said they wanted to set the bill aside because of the scale of the concerns, while also stating they did not support the bill as written. The committee then opened HB 133, dealing with DMV follow-up on residency and licensing issues tied to voting and other interactions. Department of Safety/DMV officials said the bill would require a $40,000 technology update plus a full-time position to handle manual correspondence and review of possible matches, and that postage was not included in the fiscal note. They said the bill’s 60-day residency trigger is vague, that the DMV would be acting outside its normal role by investigating status after the fact, and that the measure could create privacy and operational problems. Members questioned whether the bill would effectively force people to buy a driver’s license to vote, whether non-driver and voter ID options would avoid that concern, and whether the Secretary of State rather than DMV would be the more appropriate agency to handle any follow-up.

Transcript Highlights:

• And going back to working with DHHS and banking foster kids, I know our members have worked with their
• And going back to working with DHHS and banking foster kids, I know our members have worked with their
• And going back to working with DHHS and banking foster kids, I know our members have worked with their
• And going back to working with DHHS and banking foster kids, I know our members have worked with their
• and going back to working with um DHHS and going back to working with um DHHS and<04:56:14.160><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• overruns of around $300 million, and the current commissioner there of the department that is like our DHHS
• administering it. there of the department that is like our there of the department that is like our DHHS
• 24.239> this<01:18:24.480> is<01:18:24.640> something<01:18:24.880> he DHHS
• says that this is something he DHHS says that this is something he never<01:18:25.360> would<

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Committee to Study Long-Term Managed Care met to approve prior minutes and outline its schedule, with meetings set for September 24 and September 29 ahead of an October 1 report deadline. The chair said the committee would use the first two meetings to digest testimony, likely ask follow-up questions of DHS, and then work toward conclusions and a report format. The minutes from the previous meeting were approved unanimously. The main testimony came from Sharon Alexander of Amera Health, who argued in favor of moving from fee-for-service Medicaid long-term services and supports to a managed LTSS model. She described managed LTSS as a capitated, quality-driven system used in about 26 states, and said it can improve care coordination, accountability, access to home- and community-based services, and budget predictability. She cited Amera Health’s experience in Pennsylvania and Delaware, including care coordination, housing and transportation support, caregiver programs, and quality benchmarks tied to state oversight. She also said nursing facilities would remain an important option for people who need that level of care. Committee members asked about how the programs are administered, how rates are set, how care managers work, and how quality is measured. Alexander said states contract with managed care organizations at actuarially sound capitated rates, with annual contracts, reporting, and oversight. She explained that care managers typically conduct quarterly assessments and follow up after trigger events such as hospitalization, and that housing coordinators may assist with transitions to the community. On quality, she said states use CMS-related and HCBS benchmark measures covering service timeliness, care planning, transitions, and other outcomes, and that New Hampshire could build on existing metrics rather than starting from scratch. She also noted that rural areas face workforce and transportation challenges, which managed care plans try to address through technology and self-direction options.

Transcript Highlights:

• Certainly there's nothing other than DHHS, which does require they are required to report.
• So, DHHS, they do report their lapse whenever we meet, which is essentially monthly.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session on House Bill 592, which concerns regional conservation and energy resources planning for habitat strongholds and wildlife corridors, and a commission to study transferring ownership of the Winnipesaukee River Basin Program to another authority. Jason Stock of the New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association said his group was fine with the bill as printed, especially after Senate language clarified that habitat stronghold designations are for information gathering and not regulatory purposes. Ted Diers of the Department of Environmental Services strongly supported the bill’s Winnipesaukee River Basin provisions, saying the state’s role in operating the wastewater system is outdated and that the communities are now capable of taking more control; he also supported creating a higher-level engineering/director position to oversee aging infrastructure and help manage a possible transition. Committee members asked about the facility’s location, capacity, costs, staffing, the possibility of private operation, the commission’s membership, and whether the six-month study timeline was realistic. Diers said there would be no state savings beyond administrative time, that the communities already pay the costs, and that a report in six months should provide useful next steps even if it would not resolve everything. The chair closed the work session on HB 592 and announced a brief recess before later action, while a member indicated interest in proposing an amendment to change the commission’s membership.

Transcript Highlights:

• strengthens what is required for reporting reporting reporting to<00:34:46.879> um to um to um DHHS
• :49.240> that<00:34:49.440> this<00:34:49.840> adds<00:34:50.280> more DHHS
• So I think that this adds more DHHS.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• about prioritized needs naturally as best you can with this sort of notice, so that is related to what DHHS
• c><00:05:23.280> related<00:05:23.720> to<00:05:23.960> what<00:05:24.199> DHHS
• <00:05:25.199> wanted so that is related to what DHHS wanted so that is related to what DHHS
• He added that in the DHHS budget briefing book, Medicaid begins on page one of that document.
• budget briefing book um the the DHHS budget briefing book um the the Medicaid<00:17:28.160> begins

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division Three work session on February 21, 2025 focused on the Division of Medicaid Services budget. The chair opened with procedural guidance, noting the division’s role is to make recommendations to the full Finance Committee, that the budget must be balanced, and that members should track possible amendments ahead of a March 26 target for House Bills 1 and 2. Members also discussed the importance of using official budget documents and online resources, and the chair said no motions would be taken at this session. A major early topic was concern over a five-point Medicaid policy document and the timing of House Bill 2. Representative Tarki objected that the document appeared to be an unofficial draft and argued that significant Medicaid policy changes should have been transmitted by February 15 under state law. He said the lack of an official, posted document raised transparency concerns because the changes could affect tens of thousands of residents. Committee leadership responded that the five-point document was a working document, that it would be posted online within minutes, and that House Bill 2 is often delayed while the Office of Legislative Services finalizes and formats the governor’s proposed trailer bill. DHHS Chief Financial Officer Nathan White and Medicaid Director Henry Litman then began the budget presentation. White said the committee would use the PowerPoint as the document of record, starting with the governor’s operating budget pages 885-893, and noted that Medicaid is the largest accounting area in the state budget. He said the governor’s budget reflects about $60 million in reductions within the Medicaid area, with Granite Advantage handled off-budget and another $10 million in reductions there, for roughly a $70 million difference overall. Members asked whether the comparison was being made against an efficiency budget or a prioritized-needs budget, and White said the department could look at it different ways. The presentation then outlined Medicaid’s role in New Hampshire: it provides health coverage, serves as the state’s direct interface with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and helps finance related services such as long-term supports, school-based services, adult dental coverage, and re-entry programs for people leaving correctional settings. White also reviewed enrollment and program context, saying New Hampshire has about one in seven residents enrolled in Medicaid, making it the fourth smallest Medicaid program in the country by enrollment, and described recent efforts such as youth re-entry and the Medicaid unwind after the end of the federal continuous coverage period. He said the state had to process more than 238,000 redeterminations after the public health emergency and that the department tried to avoid unnecessary coverage loss during that transition.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to state that DHHS is a good partner for Salem Haven and supports us in many different ways
• :35.000> their<02:37:35.200> best<02:37:35.479> with<02:37:35.640> the DHHS
• is doing their best with the DHHS is doing their best with the resources<02:37:36.319> allocated<
• <02:37:46.560> good<02:37:46.800> partner<02:37:47.080> for to state that DHHS
• is a good partner for to state that DHHS is a good partner for Salem<02:37:47.680> Haven<02:37

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, and again, I don't want to disparage DHHS. I know they do the best they can.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its prior meeting and then took up House Bill 5537, a bill to repeal several obsolete or outdated code sections. Counsel explained that the bill would remove provisions related to professional development, a behavioral interventionist pilot program, county lists of facilities for child daycare, and high school graduation rates, with a proposed amendment adding another outdated education code section from 1923. The committee adopted the amendment and reported HB 5537 to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass as amended. The committee then considered House Bill 4656, which would shift truancy policy toward chronic absenteeism and earlier intervention. Counsel said the committee substitute would replace punitive status-offense treatment with wraparound services, student support specialists, and a new child-in-need-of-supervision process, while also ending compulsory attendance at age 18 and removing criminal penalties for 18-year-olds. Members questioned how the new thresholds would work, including the role of attendance directors, prosecutors, judges, and the Department of Human Services, and whether the bill would change current diversion funding or court authority. Witnesses from Fayette County, Greenbrier County, and Taylor County largely opposed the bill or urged caution. The Fayette County attendance director said current truancy procedures, including school-based probation and court involvement, help secure family participation and services, and warned that removing the status offense would weaken enforcement. A Greenbrier County probation officer said diversion programs are effective and that court involvement often leads to needed services. A Taylor County juvenile prosecutor said status-offense jurisdiction gives courts meaningful leverage and flexibility, and asked that counties be allowed to keep existing approaches that work locally. After testimony, the committee voted to report HB 4656 to the full Senate without recommendation and with a recommendation that it be re-referred to the Committee on Education, then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• potentially a judge or someone else, and how does that affect— I mean, and again, I don't want to disparage DHHS

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to talk, start talking about the part of House Bill 2 that deals with the DHH and regional day

Bills: HB2, HB2

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace

Transcript Highlights:

• research purposes, but there's other ways, and they don't give—when they disclose, there's rules under DHHS
• research purposes, but there's other ways, and they don't give—when they disclose, there's rules under DHHS
• research purposes, but there's other ways, and they don't give—when they disclose, there's rules under DHHS
• research purposes, but there's other ways, and they don't give—when they disclose, there's rules under DHHS

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.