Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:04.880><c> hearing</c><00:49:05.200><c> where</c><00:49:05.440><c> it's</c><00:49:05.680><
• ><c> throw</c><00:49:06.960><c> out</c><00:49:07.920><c> all</c><00:49:08.240><c> things</c><00:49:08.640
• ><c> that's</c><00:49:09.839><c> not</c><00:49:10.000><c> even</c><00:49:10.240><c> here</c><00:49:11.200
• They may just<00:49:35.040><c> make</c><00:49:35.200><c> them</c><00:49:35.359><c> bad</c><00:49:35.760
• If<00:49:38.880><c> they</c><00:49:39.040><c> were</c><00:49:39.200><c> legislative</c><00:49:39.839>

Summary: The commission heard argument on a renewed motion to compel discovery and related sanctions in an ethics case. Enforcement counsel said the respondent had provided incomplete and inconsistent discovery responses, including no authenticated medical records, and asked the commission to compel full interrogatory answers, bar the respondent from relying on unsupported medical claims at hearing, allow subpoenas for medical records and an LRC report, and continue the December 2 hearing. Respondent’s counsel replied that the defense had complied with discovery, that medical records were being withheld for reasons previously discussed, and that no outstanding discovery remained. The next matter was enforcement counsel’s motion in limine, which sought to exclude a wide range of evidence as irrelevant to the three ethics charges already found to have probable cause. Counsel argued the hearing should focus only on whether the respondent intimidated Fox’s, offered a favor in exchange for a donation, and engaged in inappropriate conduct while intoxicated in his office, and not on complainants’ motives, media coverage, bullying, religious discrimination claims, LRC policies, or other legislators’ conduct. He also argued that any claim of mental or physical condition should be excluded absent supporting medical proof. Respondent’s counsel opposed the motion, saying the excluded topics went to witness credibility, bias, motive, and context, and that LRC materials and testimony from additional witnesses were important to the defense. Commission members questioned both sides about the breadth of the motion in limine and whether any topics could be agreed to as irrelevant. Counsel for the respondent maintained that some challenged topics, including Lexington media coverage and broader legislative practices, were relevant to credibility and context. Enforcement counsel responded that even if such conduct were common, it would not excuse a violation of the ethics code. No final ruling or vote was announced in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• :29.440><c> voting</c><00:49:30.119><c> on</c><00:49:31.119><c> hcr1</c><00:49:32.040><c> and</c><00:
• 49:32.720><c> hr11</c> vote voting on hcr1 and hr11 vote voting on hcr1 and hr11 simultaneously<00:49
• recommendation is simultaneously chair's recommendation is to<00:49:35.640><c> pass</c><00:49:35.920
• ><c> as</c><00:49:36.079><c> is</c><00:49:36.280><c> chair</c><00:49:36.520><c> and</c><00:49:36.680>
• <c> vice</c><00:49:36.880><c> chair</c><00:49:37.079><c> vote</c> to pass as is chair and vice chair

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The House Committee on Housing met on March 21, 2025, first taking testimony on several resolutions related to housing policy and building codes. HCR 1/HR 1 urged HHFDC to continue working with the City and County of Honolulu to transfer roads in the Villages of Kapolei; the committee noted one supportive testimony from HHFDC. HCR 66/HR 60 sought action by the State Building Code Council to authorize point access block, or single-stair, residential construction up to six stories; testimony included support from Housing Hawaiʻi Future and the Grassroots Institute of Hawaiʻi, and opposition from the AIA Hawaiʻi State Council. HCR 67 asked state and county officials to develop a comprehensive strategy for updated building codes; Grassroots Institute testimony was in support and AIA Hawaiʻi State Council was in opposition. HCR 78 addressed housing credits under Act 31, clarifying that qualifying projects approved before July 1, 2031, would remain eligible after repeal; HHFDC and Na Uho testified in support. HR 147 proposed a legislative working group to oversee DHHL’s use of Act 279 funds; DHHL supported the measure, along with one individual supporter who was not present. No public testimony was offered beyond those submissions, and the committee moved to decision-making after a short recess. In decision-making, the committee adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass HCR 1/HR 1 as is, with several members excused. HCR 66/HR 60 was also passed as is after discussion emphasizing the potential for lower construction costs, more design flexibility, and better ventilation from single-stair buildings. HCR 67 was passed with amendments, including removing the housing committee chairs from the recipient list and adding language calling for reinstating and adequately funding the State Building Code Council so it can carry out its mandate. HCR 78 was passed as is, and HR 147 was passed as is after brief supportive comments about DHHL accountability. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some<00:49:31.359><c> feel</c><00:49:31.599><c> the</c><00:49:31.839><c> call</c><00:49:32.079><c> of
• . rock faces,<00:49:41.839><c> snowmobile</c><00:49:42.559><c> and</c><00:49:42.800><c> ATV</c><00:49
• You<00:49:47.839><c> name</c><00:49:48.079><c> it,</c><00:49:48.960><c> we've</c><00:49:49.359><c> got
• </c><00:49:49.520><c> it</c><00:49:49.680><c> here</c><00:49:49.920><c> in</c><00:49:50.160><c> New</
• I</c><00:49:56.640><c> think</c><00:49:56.800><c> it</c><00:49:57.040><c> is</c><00:49:57.599><c> what

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:49:08.040><c> regarding</c><00:49:08.440><c> the</c><00:49:08.960><c> regret</c><00:49:09.400>
• used for<00:49:11.760><c> other</c><00:49:12.240><c> conditions</c><00:49:12.640><c> like</c><00:49:
• <00:49:17.640><c> it's</c><00:49:17.839><c> coming</c><00:49:18.599><c> thank</c><00:49:18.799><c> you
• 49:48.319><c> I</c><00:49:48.440><c> love</c><00:49:49.200><c> everybody</c><00:49:50.200><c> so</c>
• ><c> as</c><00:49:52.799><c> an</c><00:49:53.079><c> adult</c><00:49:54.000><c> this</c><00:49:54.359

Committee: House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• :01.480><c> is</c><00:49:01.720><c> that</c><00:49:02.000><c> was</c><00:49:02.640><c> this</c><00:49
• </c><00:49:07.440><c> a</c><00:49:07.559><c> new</c><00:49:07.839><c> comp</c><00:49:08.200><c> plan<
• then<00:49:09.599><c> would</c><00:49:09.839><c> cost</c><00:49:10.160><c> hundreds</c><00:49:10.559
• there</c><00:49:16.359><c> a</c><00:49:16.520><c> fiscal</c><00:49:16.880><c> note</c><00:49:17.160>
• </c><00:49:20.359><c> some</c><00:49:20.760><c> compensation</c><00:49:21.319><c> to</c><00:49:21.480

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:02.040><c> well</c><00:49:02.240><c> I</c><00:49:02.359><c> have</c><00:49:03.040><c> having
• ><c> this</c><00:49:04.359><c> my</c><00:49:04.480><c> fifth</c><00:49:04.760><c> year</c><00:49:05.520
• 49:06.640><c> Hava</c><00:49:07.480><c> I</c><00:49:07.599><c> think</c><00:49:07.880><c> that</c> we
• </c><00:49:08.599><c> been</c><00:49:08.960><c> and</c><00:49:09.119><c> we've</c><00:49:09.319><c> always
• into</c><00:49:14.319><c> uh</c><00:49:14.520><c> the</c><00:49:14.720><c> state</c><00:49:15.319><c>

Bills: HF1345 , HF71 , HF993 , HF1943

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:05.800><c> What</c><00:49:05.960><c> would</c><00:49:06.040><c> that</c><00:49:06.200><c>
• It'd<00:49:07.320><c> be</c><00:49:07.440><c> a</c><00:49:07.480><c> lot</c><00:49:07.720><c> easier<
• /c><00:49:07.960><c> to</c><00:49:08.080><c> budget</c><00:49:09.000><c> um</c><00:49:09.240><c> if</
• I<00:49:12.760><c> think</c><00:49:12.960><c> we</c><00:49:13.040><c> can</c><00:49:13.200><c> help</
• Um right<00:49:16.200><c> now</c><00:49:16.480><c> we</c><00:49:16.680><c> kind</c><00:49:16.880><c>

Summary: The committee opened by explaining it would work through a long list of interim topics one at a time and asked members to complete a selection form at the end. The first topic, long-term care, drew testimony from AARP Wyoming and the Wyoming Long-Term Care Association. AARP emphasized Wyoming’s aging population, the state’s roughly $200 million annual Medicaid spending on long-term care, and the need to examine whether more support for home-based care could reduce nursing home use and costs. The association agreed with supporting people at home as long as possible, but asked that any study also consider increased support for nursing homes and assisted living when home care is no longer feasible. Committee discussion also touched on adult day care and PACE-like services, with Mr. Laycock noting prior Department of Health discussion and limited adult day availability due to reimbursement concerns. The committee then heard proposals for neonatal intensive care unit family leave, expanded midwifery scope, and a modification to workers’ compensation law. The NICU leave idea, presented by the Wyoming Women’s Foundation, would explore leave options for families with premature infants in intensive care, potentially paid or unpaid, while considering business size and the burden on families who may need out-of-state care. The midwifery topic was framed as a way to address rural maternity and women’s health gaps by allowing midwives to practice to the full extent of their training. On workers’ compensation, the Wyoming Association of Municipalities sought to classify dispatch personnel as first responders so they could receive mental health coverage under workers’ compensation; the Department of Workforce Services explained that current law covers dispatchers under workers’ compensation generally, but the first responder mental health provision added in 2018 applies to law enforcement and firefighters and does not currently include dispatchers. Other topics included problematic gaming and program funding, breast cancer diagnostic and supplemental exams, prescription drug coverage for advanced metastatic cancer, SNAP education, behavioral health workforce clinical training site shortages, CPR in schools, and broader midwifery oversight. The behavioral health workforce proposal, brought by a WICHE commissioner, focused on increasing psychology internship slots in Wyoming, noting that the state currently has only three and that expanding placements could improve recruitment and retention. The CPR in schools topic drew strong support from the American Heart Association, which argued that CPR training in high school could improve bystander response in a rural state with long EMS response times; committee members asked about cost and curriculum fit, and the witnesses said hands-only CPR could be taught by school staff rather than requiring expensive certification. The midwifery discussion later broadened into concerns about oversight and standards after a representative described a constituent’s pregnancy loss and said complaints involving midwifery practice and staffing delays in investigations warranted a deeper review. No votes were taken during the portion provided, and most topics were simply introduced, discussed, and left open for further testimony or later committee selection.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:04.200><c> isn't</c><00:49:04.520><c> going</c><00:49:04.760><c> to</c><00:49:05.520><c> say
• 49:08.480><c> a</c><00:49:08.720><c> we</c><00:49:08.880><c> had</c><00:49:09.000><c> a</c><00:49:09.160
• ><c> run</c><00:49:10.200><c> in</c><00:49:10.319><c> the</c><00:49:10.480><c> red</c><00:49:11.119><
• :24.359><c> it</c><00:49:24.480><c> goes</c><00:49:24.680><c> back</c><00:49:24.799><c> to</c><00:49:
• ><c> a</c><00:49:52.680><c> little</c><00:49:52.920><c> bit</c><00:49:53.160><c> of</c><00:49:53.640>

Summary: The committee received an orientation from University System of New Hampshire Chancellor Katherine Preventure and Senior Director of Government Relations Lauren Banker on the system’s enrollment, finances, workforce role, and academic programs. They described the system as consisting of UNH, Keene State, and Plymouth State, with about 23,000 students, $928 million in FY24 operating expenses, a $3.7 billion economic impact, and UNH’s R1 research status. They emphasized the system’s role in graduating students into the New Hampshire workforce, its statewide Cooperative Extension and regional campus presence, and its alignment of degree offerings with top occupations identified by New Hampshire Employment Security. The presentation also highlighted partnerships with businesses, internships, and collaboration with the community college system, including 100 transfer pathways and a direct-admit program. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on tuition, state support, and student costs. The chancellor said the state invested $95 million in FY25, with about $81 million used to reduce resident tuition and about $14 million for statutory programs such as Cooperative Extension and the Agricultural Experiment Station. She said the state subsidy is about $7,300 per New Hampshire student, and that resident net tuition averages about $7,000, while nonresident net tuition averages about $16,600. She provided published tuition figures for UNH, Plymouth State, and Keene State, and explained that resident tuition has been held flat for five years while financial aid has increased, reducing average net tuition and fees for New Hampshire students from about $10,500 in 2020 to $9,800. Members asked for clarification on how residency and workforce-retention percentages were calculated, and the chancellor said she would follow up. Members also asked about comparisons with peer institutions, housing and meal costs, research funding, and the reasons for declining enrollment and staffing reductions. The chancellor said peer comparisons were based on flagship universities for UNH and smaller regional publics for Plymouth and Keene, and noted that out-of-state tuition has risen about 2.5% annually. She said housing for a UNH double room is $8,536 and a meal plan is $5,100, and offered to provide a consolidated cost document. On research, she said the system’s direct research spending includes federal funding and that indirect costs were about $34 million last year, with a follow-up promised on the federal/state and direct/indirect split. She attributed enrollment declines largely to demographics and said the system is responding by reducing costs, selling buildings, exiting leases, moving the system office to NHTI, and implementing Workday. She also noted that Plymouth received approval for five three-year bachelor’s degree programs and that members praised the shorter, workforce-focused pathways, especially for manufacturing and other in-demand fields.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:49:05.360><c> I</c><01:49:06.520><c> uh</c><01:49:07.520><c> can</c><01:49:07.760><c> you</c>
• I mean,<01:49:14.400><c> I</c><01:49:14.560><c> assume</c><01:49:14.800><c> that</c><01:49:15.360><c>
• Um,<01:49:23.600><c> that</c><01:49:23.840><c> wouldn't</c><01:49:24.159><c> make</c><01:49:24.400><c
• :34.480><c> also</c><01:49:34.719><c> has</c><01:49:34.960><c> been</c><01:49:35.119><c> my</c><01:49
• ><01:49:49.600><c> they're</c><01:49:49.880><c> agreeing</c><01:49:50.880><c> to</c><01:49:51.560><c>

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Sen. Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would codify the department’s interpretation that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary coverage for a newborn, unless the mother has no insurance or coverage under an employer-sponsored plan. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure is a clarification of existing practice and intended to protect vulnerable newborns; a question from Rep. Miles clarified that if a young woman is on her parents’ policy, the newborn would generally be covered under that family coverage. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee then took up Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Sen. Kevin Avard, which would require insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, Medicare Advantage plans. Commissioner Benton Court said the bill arose from disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers, brokers, and the department were confused by carriers changing or ending offerings; he said the department wanted a simple notification requirement so it could better advise consumers. Members discussed network adequacy, county-based service areas, and the fact that the bill would make notice a condition of licensure, with possible fines or license action for noncompliance. Witness Paula Rogers of AHIP said her group supported the bill if amended, and the department indicated it would support a change from a 120-day notice period to 90 days to align with state rules; the committee planned to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Rep. Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion of pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole argued the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell drugs at a loss, describing PBMs as middlemen and saying the measure is a compromise that protects local pharmacies. Members questioned whether consumers would pay more and whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts; Cole responded that the bill would let pharmacies refuse unprofitable fills while consumers could still obtain the drug through mail order or other channels. He also said the issue has changed over time because the practice now affects a much larger share of generics and is concentrated among a few PBMs. The hearing remained open as questions continued, with no vote taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• How<00:49:00.240><c> can</c><00:49:00.400><c> we</c><00:49:00.520><c> build</c><00:49:00.800><c> that
• Whatever<00:49:03.520><c> it</c><00:49:03.600><c> is,</c><00:49:03.880><c> we've</c><00:49:04.120><c>
• ><c> to</c><00:49:05.440><c> quickly</c><00:49:05.960><c> automate</c><00:49:06.480><c> as</c><00:49:
• Um on<00:49:10.920><c> one</c><00:49:11.080><c> of</c><00:49:11.120><c> the</c><00:49:11.240><c> slides
• ,</c><00:49:12.200><c> you</c><00:49:12.320><c> know,</c><00:49:12.400><c> we</c><00:49:12.480><c> talk

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> get</c><00:49:02.559><c> a</c><00:49:02.800><c> 1041</c><00:49:03.760><c> they</c><00:49:04.000>
• ><c> 1041</c><00:49:07.119><c> and</c><00:49:07.359><c> it's</c><00:49:07.599><c> reported</c><00:49:
• </c><00:49:11.359><c> Let</c><00:49:11.520><c> me</c><00:49:11.680><c> stop</c><00:49:11.839><c> it</
• </c><00:49:12.319><c> The</c><00:49:12.559><c> creditors</c><00:49:13.520><c> then</c><00:49:14.000><
• 1041</c><00:49:20.160><c> on</c><00:49:20.400><c> behalf</c><00:49:20.640><c> of</c><00:49:20.800><c

Transcript Highlights:

• Um I would<00:49:00.800><c> need</c><00:49:00.960><c> to</c><00:49:01.119><c> look</c><00:49:01.200><
• One<00:49:08.079><c> of</c><00:49:08.160><c> the</c><00:49:08.240><c> questions</c><00:49:08.480><c>
• is is the way<00:49:12.559><c> in</c><00:49:12.800><c> which</c><00:49:13.040><c> reserve</c><00:49:
• those</c><00:49:25.599><c> kinds</c><00:49:25.760><c> of</c><00:49:25.920><c> comparisons</c><00:49:
• ><c> at</c><00:49:42.000><c> page</c><00:49:42.720><c> one</c><00:49:43.839><c> down</c><00:49:44.240

Committee: House Education Funding

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:05.359><c> actually</c><00:49:06.559><c> make</c><00:49:06.720><c> it</c><00:49:06.960><c>
• inside<00:49:17.920><c> the</c><00:49:18.240><c> Department</c><00:49:18.640><c> of</c><00:49:18.880
• </c><00:49:26.640><c> So</c><00:49:26.800><c> the</c><00:49:27.040><c> Trump's</c><00:49:27.680><c> VA
• </c><00:49:33.280><c> stay</c><00:49:33.520><c> in</c><00:49:33.760><c> their</c><00:49:34.000><c> homes
• From<06:49:37.280><c> the</c><06:49:37.440><c> northeast</c><06:49:37.840><c> to</c><06:49:38.000><c>

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:49:11.040><c> And</c><01:49:11.360><c> so</c><01:49:11.520><c> instead</c><01:49:11.840><c> of
• > these</c><01:49:17.679><c> bills</c><01:49:18.480><c> um</c><01:49:18.719><c> especially</c><01:49:
• c> at,</c><01:49:21.119><c> but</c><01:49:21.360><c> we</c><01:49:21.600><c> actually</c><01:49:21.840
• need to think<01:49:22.320><c> about</c><01:49:22.480><c> the</c><01:49:22.719><c> systems</c><01:49
• And that to me<01:49:29.360><c> is</c><01:49:29.600><c> work</c><01:49:29.760><c> that</c><01:49:29.920

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• believe<00:49:04.400><c> we</c><00:49:04.640><c> should</c><00:49:05.040><c> uh</c><00:49:05.520><c>
• :09.680><c> And</c><00:49:09.839><c> if</c><00:49:10.000><c> you</c><00:49:10.079><c> want</c><00:49:
• </c><00:49:14.160><c> be</c><00:49:14.319><c> more</c><00:49:14.480><c> appropriate</c><00:49:15.559>
• ><c> urge</c><00:49:28.480><c> us</c><00:49:28.720><c> to</c><00:49:29.359><c> pass</c><00:49:29.680>
• ><c> the</c><00:49:32.319><c> DHS,</c><00:49:33.280><c> and</c><00:49:33.680><c> uh</c><00:49:33.760>

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first took up Senate Bill 268, a bill related to biological sex and related classifications. Members opposing the bill argued it was unnecessary, poorly drafted, and a personal attack on a small group of people, while supporters said it was needed to protect girls and women and to avoid repeated floor debate on a measure they viewed as proper. Several members also discussed the bill’s definition of biological sex, the lack of guidance on what information could be required to make determinations, and concerns about unintended consequences. The committee voted on a motion to retain the bill and approved it by a 10-8 roll call vote, with the bill retained. The committee then moved to Senate Bill 189, described by supporters as a housekeeping measure requested by the Secretary of State and the Department of Health and Human Services concerning fetal death records. Supporters said the bill was narrow, time-sensitive, and ready to pass, while opponents argued it needed further work and that the committee should not use retention to reopen the bill for broader changes. Some members said they wanted to add or explore additional provisions related to fetal death reporting, while others objected that such changes were outside the bill’s scope and poor procedure. After debate, the committee voted to retain Senate Bill 189 as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the last one,<00:49:00.319><c> the</c><00:49:01.200><c> use</c><00:49:01.920><c> Senate</c><00:49
• ><c> a</c><00:49:04.720><c> vote,</c><00:49:05.119><c> but</c><00:49:05.440><c> what</c><00:49:05.599
• ><c> doing</c><00:49:06.400><c> is</c><00:49:06.640><c> presenting</c><00:49:07.119><c> it</c><00:49:
• 49:40.240><c> around</c><00:49:40.480><c> the</c><00:49:40.720><c> country</c><00:49:41.680><c> and</
• create</c><00:49:46.240><c> I</c><00:49:46.480><c> would</c><00:49:46.640><c> call</c><00:49:46.800>

Committee: Joint Judiciary, Division A

Transcript Highlights:

• or and<00:49:05.920><c> then</c><00:49:06.079><c> again</c><00:49:06.319><c> we</c><00:49:06.559><c>
• can</c><00:49:06.720><c> we</c><00:49:06.960><c> can</c><00:49:07.040><c> move</c><00:49:07.280><c>
• move on and and<00:49:08.559><c> I</c><00:49:08.880><c> can</c><00:49:09.119><c> ask</c><00:49:09.839
• ><c> Miss</c><00:49:10.079><c> Chaw</c><00:49:10.480><c> to</c><00:49:10.640><c> come</c><00:49:10.720
• sorry<00:49:14.240><c> I</c><00:49:14.480><c> should</c><00:49:14.640><c> have</c><00:49:14.800><c>

Committee: House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• :00.079><c> time</c><00:49:01.119><c> um</c><00:49:01.359><c> we're</c><00:49:02.319><c> um</c><00:49
• </c><01:49:04.719><c> I</c><01:49:04.960><c> believe</c><01:49:05.040><c> it</c><01:49:05.199><c> was
• :49:13.199><c> didn't</c><01:49:13.360><c> spend</c><01:49:13.679><c> 70%</c><01:49:14.239><c> of</c>
• :49:19.520><c> program</c><01:49:20.239><c> that</c><01:49:21.040><c> we</c><01:49:21.280><c> the</c>
• </c><01:49:47.199><c> It</c><01:49:47.440><c> puts</c><01:49:47.760><c> so</c><01:49:48.000><c> much<

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> agenda</c><00:49:06.359><c> and</c><00:49:06.480><c> so</c><00:49:06.760><c> I</c><00:49:06.960>
• one</c><00:49:19.640><c> but</c><00:49:19.920><c> two</c><00:49:20.480><c> when</c><00:49:20.640><c>
• ><c> I</c><00:49:33.960><c> for</c><00:49:34.160><c> the</c><00:49:34.280><c> record</c><00:49:34.680
• ><c> um</c><00:49:52.000><c> when</c><00:49:52.160><c> we</c><00:49:52.280><c> talk</c><00:49:52.520>
• </c><00:49:53.839><c> to</c><00:49:53.960><c> look</c><00:49:54.079><c> at</c><00:49:54.280><c> the</

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met to hear House Bill 520, which would authorize the Department of Education to issue subpoenas in investigations and hearings involving the code of conduct for New Hampshire educators. Representative Lynn, the bill sponsor, said the measure was intended to give the department standard subpoena power during investigations and in later adjudicatory proceedings, with a process for challenging overbroad subpoenas. He argued that agencies with investigative and hearing authority should also have the power to compel witnesses and documents, and said the bill was narrowed from an earlier broader draft to focus on teacher credentialing and address concerns about scope. Members raised several concerns about whether the department already has enough authority, whether the Attorney General could handle subpoenas instead, and whether the bill creates an imbalance by giving subpoena power mainly to the investigating side. Representative Burroughs said she did not feel she had enough information and was uncomfortable with the bill, especially regarding who bears subpoena costs. Representative Biron questioned the trial analogy and whether both sides truly have equal subpoena rights. Lynn responded that the investigative stage is like a grand jury process, where only the investigating body subpoenas witnesses, while the adjudicatory stage allows both sides to seek subpoenas through the hearing officer. Other questions focused on the bill’s scope. Representative Andreos asked what investigative authority the Department of Education already has, and Representative Organ questioned why the bill is limited to educators rather than also covering vendors, charter school boards, or the EFA scholarship organization. Lynn said the limitation to educators was deliberate, because earlier broader versions drew objections for being too expansive. Representative Tur asked whether the Attorney General could already handle such matters, and Lynn said that while the AG might be able to pursue some investigations or court subpoenas, agencies should be able to conduct their own internal investigations. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:49:04.560><c> Maybe</c><00:49:04.840><c> No,</c><00:49:05.040><c> I'm</c><00:49:05.160><c> not
• </c><00:49:10.720><c> Oh,</c><00:49:11.160><c> but</c><00:49:11.400><c> you</c><00:49:11.520><c> do</
• <00:49:13.960><c> I</c><00:49:14.160><c> must</c><00:49:14.400><c> have</c><00:49:14.480><c> missed</
• I<00:49:49.560><c> vote</c><00:49:49.760><c> 121</c><00:49:50.320><c> yay,</c><00:49:50.440><c> zero<
• <c> like</c><00:49:56.200><c> to</c><00:49:56.280><c> go</c><00:49:56.400><c> to</c><00:49:56.560><c>