Committee Summary for House Committee on Housing (04/15/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB84 00:14:20.560 - 9:13:06 AM	Public Hearing	relative to zoning procedures concerning residential housing.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB166 01:36:29.040 - 10:35:15 AM	Public Hearing	relative to notice required prior to sale of a manufactured housing unit located in a resident-owned community.	Reardon, Tara(D)
SB84 01:41:40.400 - 10:40:26 AM	Public Hearing	relative to zoning procedures concerning residential housing.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB166 02:50:36.160 - 11:49:22 AM	Public Hearing	relative to notice required prior to sale of a manufactured housing unit located in a resident-owned community.	Reardon, Tara(D)
SB163 03:16:19.600 - 12:15:05 PM	Public Hearing	prohibiting local moratoria and limitations on building permits.	Pearl, Howard (R)[C+]2024
SB281 03:53:14.720 - 12:52:00 PM	Public Hearing	prohibiting municipalities from denying building or occupancy permits for property adjacent to class VI roads under certain circumstances.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB282 04:15:18.720 - 1:14:04 PM	Public Hearing	relative to stairway requirements in certain residential buildings.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB284 2025-1556H 05:15:11.760 - 2:13:57 PM	Executive Session	relative to the required maximum number of residential parking spaces.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB91 05:17:47.600 - 2:16:33 PM	Executive Session	allowing one-time special appraisals of residences located in commercial zones.	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
SB170 05:19:34.798 - 2:18:20 PM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to development and related requirements in cities, towns, and municipalities.	Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D)[D-]2024
SB165 06:18:02.400 - 3:16:48 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the audit requirements for consumer cooperative associations.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024

SB84: Senator Murphy Support00:14:20.560 - 9:13:06 AM; Senator Murphy, the prime sponsor of SB84, emphasized the severity of the housing crisis in New Hampshire, highlighting the increasing unaffordability of homes, particularly for middle-class families, service workers, and first responders. He argued that the bill would significantly reduce housing costs by limiting the minimum lot size requirements in towns, which currently force developers to build larger, more expensive homes on large plots. He noted that the bill allows for flexibility in lot sizes while still preserving local control, except in areas where environmental regulations necessitate larger lots. He also mentioned a recent poll indicating that 55% of New Hampshire voters see housing costs as the state's biggest issue, underscoring the urgency of addressing this problem through bold legislative action like SB84.
SB84: Representative Guthrie from Hamstead Oppose00:23:58.000 - 9:22:44 AM; Representative Guthrie, who also serves as a selectman and planning board member in Hamstead, expressed opposition to SB84. He criticized the bill for using the word 'shall,' which he believes infringes on local control. He argued that zoning should remain a local matter and warned that setting arbitrary state parameters could cause harm. He suggested the committee consider the bill's impact on local governance and recommended it be found inexpedient to legislate (ITL).
SB84: Representative Flanigan from Brookline and Mason Oppose00:27:02.720 - 9:25:48 AM; Representative Flanigan, representing Brookline and Mason, opposed SB84 based on his personal experience living in these towns. He disputed Senator Murphy's claim about Brookline's zoning, stating it has had a two-acre minimum for a long time. He shared how increased development in Brookline led to a significant rise in school costs and property taxes, arguing that the bill's proposed changes would exacerbate these issues. He warned that allowing two-acre lots would not necessarily lead to affordable starter homes and could drive up taxes, contradicting the state's goal to avoid policies that raise taxes or stifle economic growth.
SB84: Representative Flanigan from Brookline and Mason Oppose00:31:28.320 - 9:30:14 AM; Representative Flanigan expressed opposition to SB84, emphasizing the importance of local control over zoning and housing decisions. He discussed the negative impacts of rapid growth on his community, including increased demands on infrastructure like road maintenance and schools. He shared an anecdote about Brookline's legal battle over workforce housing and zoning, highlighting the financial and community burdens such mandates can impose. Flanigan also touched on the challenges of housing costs due to inflation and other economic factors, suggesting that zoning alone cannot solve the housing crisis.
SB84: Representative Terry Spar from Hanover and Lyme Oppose00:37:17.119 - 9:36:03 AM; Representative Terry Spar opposed SB84, arguing against the bill's approach to zoning and housing. He highlighted the importance of preserving the unique qualities and autonomy of New Hampshire's towns and villages. Spar criticized the bill for undermining local control and decision-making, suggesting it contradicts Republican values of limited government intervention. He proposed alternative solutions that incentivize rather than mandate housing supply increases at the local level, emphasizing the need to respect community self-determination.
SB84: Representative Christine Perez from Londonderry Oppose00:40:32.760 - 9:39:18 AM; Representative Christine Perez strongly opposed SB84, focusing on the principle of local control. She argued that the bill would impose unnecessary burdens on towns in terms of safety, police, fire, and school services, without allowing local input. Perez highlighted the potential for increased taxes due to mandated housing developments and criticized the bill for treating all towns uniformly, likening it to mandating 'blue houses' across the state. She suggested that if the bill's proponents were confident in its benefits, it should be presented as an option to be voted on by towns, not a mandate. Perez also noted that lowering interest rates would be more effective in addressing housing affordability than the proposed zoning changes.
SB84: Greg Moore, Regional Director with Americans for Prosperity Support00:46:47.760 - 9:45:33 AM; Greg Moore testified in support of Senate Bill 84, emphasizing that it appropriately adjusts the balance of property rights and enables communities to direct development. He addressed concerns about school capacity due to declining student populations and argued that local control should extend to individual rights, which he believes the state has a responsibility to protect, unlike local governments.
SB84: Mike Skelton, President & CEO of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire Support00:48:33.119 - 9:47:19 AM; Mike Skelton expressed support for Senate Bill 84, highlighting its role in land use reform as crucial for addressing the housing supply and affordability crisis. He discussed the aging workforce in New Hampshire and the need for growth to maintain economic competitiveness. Skelton also countered arguments against the bill, stating it offers flexibility and does not remove local control but rather establishes reasonable guidelines.
SB84: Ray Brereslin, from the town of Londonderry Oppose00:55:22.400 - 9:54:08 AM; Ray Brereslin opposed Senate Bill 84, expressing concerns that it primarily benefits developers and real estate businesses. He argued that the housing crisis stems from high costs rather than a lack of units, affecting essential workers and young people who cannot afford homes in towns like Londonderry. Brereslin emphasized the importance of town master plans and questioned the effectiveness of the bill in providing affordable housing.
SB84: Unknown Speaker, Londonderry Information Only00:58:41.280 - 9:57:27 AM; The speaker emphasized the challenges average citizens face in participating in legislative meetings due to work and family commitments. They highlighted the importance of local control and mentioned the health and welfare concerns in Londonderry, particularly water contamination issues in southern New Hampshire. The speaker urged the committee to consider the long-term implications of their decisions for future generations.
SB84: Unknown Speaker, Londonderry Information Only00:59:58.640 - 9:58:44 AM; The speaker continued discussing the impact of housing issues on future generations and the economic challenges in Londonderry. They noted the town's strategic location near major routes and an airport, which makes it desirable for development but also mentioned the exodus of businesses from the area. The speaker admitted not having all the answers but stressed the need for thoughtful consideration of housing policies.
SB84: Mike Padmore, AARP New Hampshire Support01:01:45.920 - 10:00:31 AM; Mike Padmore, Director of Advocacy for AARP New Hampshire, expressed support for Senate Bill 84. He discussed the housing challenges faced by AARP members, particularly the difficulty in downsizing due to rising property taxes and insurance costs. He highlighted the need for more smaller housing options and shared a personal story of a UNH graduate leaving New Hampshire due to housing availability issues.
SB84: Grace Nordman, AARP Volunteer, Newport Support01:03:52.400 - 10:02:38 AM; Grace Nordman, a retired real estate agent and AARP volunteer, supported SB84 to address the serious problem of affordable housing in New Hampshire. She emphasized the limited housing options for the aging population and the need for planned communities to allow seniors to stay in the state. She shared her personal experience of moving across different towns in New Hampshire and the significant increase in home prices in Newport, an area considered affordable.
SB84: Grace Nordman, AARP Volunteer, Newport Support01:03:52.400 - 10:02:38 AM; Grace Nordman concluded her testimony supporting SB84, emphasizing the unaffordability of housing for both young and older people. She noted that older individuals are renting out rooms to afford staying in their homes and expressed hope that the bill would alleviate some of these issues.
SB84: Megan Portoy, Planning Board, Canterbury Oppose01:07:27.400 - 10:06:13 AM; Megan Portoy from Canterbury expressed strong opposition to SB84, arguing that it represents an overreach by the state into local zoning matters. She criticized the bill for imposing a one-size-fits-all mandate that undermines local governance and does not address the actual drivers of the housing crisis, such as landlord pricing and the disappearance of long-term rentals. She also highlighted the potential psychological toll on communities due to rapid, unplanned development and the loss of green spaces, which she believes are crucial for mental health and community identity.
SB84: Chris Norwood, 2025 Vice Chair, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Public Policy Committee Support01:11:44.640 - 10:10:30 AM; Chris Norwood spoke in favor of SB84, representing the New Hampshire Association of Realtors. He addressed concerns about increased student populations due to development, citing studies that show no correlation between tax increases and student growth due to excess capacity in schools. He also discussed the acute housing problem in New Hampshire, arguing that increased density could lead to more affordable housing by reducing land development costs. Norwood emphasized that the bill does not attack local control but rather allows for a significant portion of land to retain rural characteristics, supported by legal precedents that promote the general welfare beyond town boundaries.
SB84: Jim Jalbert, Owner of CJ Bus Lines, Resident of Rollinsford Oppose01:17:45.440 - 10:16:31 AM; Jim Jalbert from Rollinsford opposed SB84, arguing that zoning has been effectively managed by local governments for a century. He cited the example of Rollinsford's zoning efforts and criticized the bill for ignoring local efforts and not addressing specific local issues like aquifer and slope concerns. Jalbert suggested that the state should form a work committee to collaboratively address the housing crisis rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all solution. He highlighted the financial burden the bill would impose on towns and suggested alternative solutions like repurposing existing buildings with developer incentives.
SB84: Matt Mayberry, CEO of the New Hampshire Homebuilders Association Support01:25:38.360 - 10:24:24 AM; Matt Mayberry expressed strong support for SB84, emphasizing its importance in sparking necessary discussions across the state about housing. He clarified that the bill does not override existing deed or septic well requirements, countering previous arguments about slope restrictions. Mayberry highlighted that SB84 aims to return decision-making power to landowners and taxpayers, using an example from Bington, New Hampshire, where a zoning change drastically reduced land value and housing potential. He criticized the New Hampshire Municipal Association for supporting policies that control landowners and devalue private property, asserting that SB84 restores balance and ensures property rights across the state.
SB84: Greg Mi, Chair of the Canterbury Planning Board Oppose01:29:40.480 - 10:28:26 AM; Greg Mi opposed SB84, emphasizing the efforts of Canterbury to address housing issues while preserving rural character. He discussed the town's adoption of an ADU law and other innovative land use planning strategies aimed at increasing density while maintaining the rural aesthetic important for tourism. Mi argued that SB84 would cut incentives for these strategies, making it difficult to balance rural character with necessary development. He responded to questions about the impact of other towns' zoning on Canterbury's rural character, suggesting that overdevelopment could have negative long-term effects. He also discussed the possibility of recreating walkable, community-oriented developments like Shaker Village under current zoning laws.
SB166: Tara Rearen, Senator from District 15 Support01:36:29.040 - 10:35:15 AM; Senator Tara Rearen introduced SB166, which aims to require sellers of manufactured housing in resident-owned communities to provide prospective buyers with information about the community's bylaws, fee schedule, and financial statement. She highlighted her previous work with the New Hampshire Community Loan Fund, which has been instrumental in helping residents own the land under their manufactured homes, improving housing security. Rearen explained that the bill, modeled after existing condominium laws, would help buyers and sellers in these communities transact with confidence by ensuring they have access to necessary community information.
SB166: Bolio Information Only01:39:07.040 - 10:37:53 AM; Bolio, representing an unspecified town or organization, asked about the recourse for buyers if required information is not delivered before closing and the penalties for owners or associations if they fail to deliver this information. He suggested that the Realtors Association might provide more detailed information on these matters.
SB84: Jason Sorens, Amherst, NH Support01:41:40.400 - 10:40:26 AM; Jason Sorens, an economist from Amherst, NH, and principal investigator on the New Hampshire Zoning Atlas, spoke in support of SB84. He discussed the economic evidence linking residential land use regulations to housing supply and affordability, emphasizing that restrictive zoning increases housing costs. Sorens specifically addressed minimum lot sizes, citing examples from various towns like Wear, Allentown, Roxbury, and Lyme, noting that high minimum lot sizes in these towns could be affected by the bill. He argued that such regulations contribute to a 'race to the bottom' where towns increase restrictions in response to neighboring towns, ultimately leading to less housing and higher costs. Sorens highlighted public support for more affordable housing, especially among younger voters, and stressed the need to consider their interests in housing policy.
SB84: Sharon Monahan, Peterborough, NH Oppose01:48:05.440 - 10:46:51 AM; Sharon Monahan from Peterborough, NH, expressed opposition to SB84. She criticized the bill for promoting traditional zoning and higher density without creating affordable housing, potentially reverting to the zoning practices that initially caused housing issues. Monahan argued that the bill could prevent innovative housing solutions like open space cluster subdivisions and might lead to gentrification in existing working-class neighborhoods. She also mentioned concerns about the bill inflating property values without addressing affordability, using the example of how land values in Peterborough have risen significantly.
SB84: Taylor, NH Support01:53:09.560 - 10:51:55 AM; Taylor supports SB84, emphasizing that it provides more housing options without prohibiting large lots. The bill aims to help seniors downsize, young families find starter homes, and address economic and community challenges. Taylor highlights the flexibility in the bill regarding rural district zoning and mentions the majority of jurisdictions already zoning for smaller lots. The speaker also counters claims that the bill goes against the will of New Hampshire residents, citing surveys that show strong public support for allowing homes on smaller lots to address housing affordability.
SB84: Neil Kirk, Wear, NH Oppose01:55:52.719 - 10:54:38 AM; Neil Kirk opposes SB84, using a personal anecdote to illustrate the potential for overdevelopment. He critiques the bill's assumption that uniform zoning across different towns like Pittsburgh, Pittsfield, Greenville, Greenfield, Bedford, and Bartlett is feasible or beneficial. Kirk argues that the bill will not lead to affordable housing but rather to more expensive homes like McMansions. He suggests hearing from independent economists to assess the bill's impact on housing prices and calls for direct subsidies to achieve affordable housing goals.
SB84: Ivy Van, Peterborough, NH Support01:59:30.159 - 10:58:16 AM; Ivy Van, a former legislator and current land use planner from Peterborough, supports SB84. She shares her experience with the Housing Opportunity Planning Grant, noting its limited success in encouraging zoning changes. Van argues that SB84 is a necessary step as it does not rely on individual towns to change zoning, which is challenging and often not replicated by neighboring towns. She explains the bill's provisions for zoning lots with and without water and sewer services and stresses that increasing the supply of housing, regardless of its type, can help affordability by increasing the overall availability of homes.
SB84: Bertie Duchess, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose02:04:55.239 - 11:03:41 AM; Bertie Duchess, representing the New Hampshire Municipal Association, opposes SB84, calling it the 'Gentrification Act of 2025'. Duchess argues that the bill lacks flexibility, removes local control, and does not incentivize the construction of starter or smaller homes. She criticizes the removal of funding for housing champions from the state budget, which was crucial for municipalities to encourage development. Duchess also mentions opposition from the New Hampshire Planners Association and raises concerns about the bill's impact on municipal infrastructure, particularly water and sewer systems, suggesting that the bill could lead to increased property taxes and potential environmental and health risks due to insufficient planning and consideration of local capacities.
SB84: Bertie Duchess, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose02:04:55.239 - 11:03:41 AM; Bertie Duchess expressed opposition to SB84, emphasizing the importance of local control and the ineffectiveness of the bill in addressing housing issues. He suggested that funding programs like the Housing Champions Fund and not defunding regional planning commissions could help municipalities plan and promote development. He also highlighted the need for increased funding for infrastructure, particularly water systems, to support higher density and cluster developments. Duchess argued that without funding, the bill would not lead to an increase in housing and would only burden municipalities with the costs of managing growth.
SB84: Kim St. Helair, Select Board and Planning Board, Town of Rollinsford Oppose02:25:00.080 - 11:23:46 AM; Kim St. Helair testified against SB84, stating that the bill's costs are indeterminate and that it fails to explore the financial impacts on small communities like Rollinsford. She detailed the town's limited capacity for growth, including its elementary school, fire department, and police force, and argued that the bill would necessitate significant financial burdens such as building a new school and increasing staffing across departments. St. Helair emphasized that the bill does not ensure affordable housing development and could harm environmental protections, urging the committee to reject the bill and seek more responsible solutions.
SB84: Diana Lush Oppose02:28:55.800 - 11:27:41 AM; Diana Lush opposed SB84, reiterating the points made by previous speakers that the bill would not create affordable housing. She questioned the effectiveness of reducing lot sizes in increasing housing supply and highlighted the broader economic pressures affecting affordability. Lush suggested that collaboration between state and local officials could lead to better solutions and raised the possibility of rent control as a means to address housing costs. She also pointed out the potential legal costs associated with the bill's empirical evidence requirement and its lack of focus on senior housing.
SB84: Robert McDonald, Planning Board, Town of Raymond Oppose02:37:26.560 - 11:36:12 AM; Robert McDonald opposed SB84, arguing that it would not solve the issues of affordable or workforce housing. He shared his background in property valuation to underline the potential negative impacts of the bill on property values and municipal finances. McDonald emphasized the importance of local decision-making through zoning ordinances and criticized the bill for not addressing the actual cost barriers to housing development. He used an example of a delayed development project to illustrate the real challenges developers face, suggesting that the bill's approach would not effectively increase housing supply.
SB84: Jim Mloud, Town Moderator, Director of Planning and Development, Town of Raymond Oppose02:42:06.160 - 11:40:52 AM; Jim Mloud expressed his principled opposition to SB84, emphasizing that Raymond's zoning is already compliant and regularly reviewed. He highlighted the constitutional nature of local zoning and his concerns about the bill's implications. Additionally, he defended the New Hampshire Municipal Association (NHMA) against claims that it works against residents' rights, stating that the services provided by NHMA are invaluable to his town's budget and operations.
SB84: Patricia Bridgio, Town of Raymond Oppose02:45:48.000 - 11:44:34 AM; Patricia Bridgio opposed SB84, suggesting that the committee should table not just this bill but related bills due to their interconnected and redundant nature. She discussed Raymond's efforts to meet housing demands and the financial and infrastructural burdens these bills could impose on towns. She stressed the need for honest discussions with towns to find solutions to housing issues.
SB166: Jim Mloud, Town of Raymond Support02:50:36.160 - 11:49:22 AM; Jim Mloud briefly supported SB166, stating his agreement with the bill's transparency measures and its protection of people's rights.
SB166: Bob Quinn, CEO, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Support02:51:48.640 - 11:50:34 AM; Bob Quinn supported SB166, explaining that the bill extends the financial disclosure requirements from the Condominium Act to resident-owned communities. He noted that while most communities provide this information, some do not, and this bill aims to ensure consistency. He also mentioned that typically, showing the statute to resistant associations resolves the issue, though there is no specific penalty for non-compliance outlined in the bill.
SB163: Grant Bossi, Deputy Chief of Staff, New Hampshire Senate on behalf of Senator Howard Pearl Support03:16:19.600 - 12:15:05 PM; Grant Bossi introduced SB163 on behalf of Senator Howard Pearl, stating that the bill aims to prevent municipalities from imposing blanket moratoria on building permits. He emphasized the need to eliminate barriers to addressing New Hampshire's housing crisis and clarified that the bill does not alter local ordinances other than the moratorium policy. He mentioned that the bill has been worked on with stakeholders to reach a consensus.
SB163: Representative Christine Perez, Londonderry Oppose03:18:58.800 - 12:17:44 PM; Representative Perez questioned the necessity and beneficiaries of the bill. She highlighted the recent election in Londonderry where a candidate who ran on limiting building was elected, indicating community opposition to further development. She mentioned the town's master plan and the recent approval of developments with significant tax cuts, emphasizing the need for a moratorium to assess the impact on local services like police, fire, and DPW.
SB163: Representative Liz Barber, Hollis Oppose03:20:28.200 - 12:19:14 PM; Representative Barber opposed SB163, arguing that it would remove the ability of municipalities to enact temporary moratoriums on development, which she sees as a critical tool for managing growth within the limits of local infrastructure. She emphasized the lack of public water and sewer systems in Hollis, stressing the importance of measured planning to sustain development safely.
SB163: Brody To Shares, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose03:23:50.319 - 12:22:36 PM; Brody To Shares opposed the bill, explaining that it would repeal RSA 674:23, which allows municipalities to establish temporary moratoriums on development. He highlighted the historical context of the law and its necessity as a last-resort remedy for towns facing rapid population growth without adequate infrastructure. He also mentioned the specific case of Conway to illustrate the utility of moratoriums.
SB163: Matt Mayberry, CEO of New Hampshire Homebuilders Association Support03:27:15.920 - 12:26:01 PM; Matt Mayberry supported SB163, arguing that local moratoriums hinder the construction of much-needed housing, including workforce housing. He cited an example of a town blocking a housing project despite meeting zoning requirements and criticized the use of moratoriums as potentially discriminatory and contrary to addressing the statewide housing crisis.
SB163: Randy Marman Oppose03:30:48.000 - 12:29:34 PM; Randy Marman opposed the bill, highlighting its potential danger and the importance of local control through moratoriums. He shared an example from his town where a moratorium was necessary to address a water system issue, emphasizing the need for such tools to manage local crises effectively.
SB163: Jim Mloud, Raymond Oppose03:35:01.880 - 12:33:47 PM; Jim Mloud opposed the bill, clarifying that the moratorium in Raymond was related to water hookups rather than building permits. He supported retaining the moratorium authority as a potential tool for future local issues, despite not needing it currently.
SB163: Diana Lush, Raymond Oppose03:37:17.160 - 12:36:03 PM; Diana Lush opposed the bill, emphasizing that the moratorium in Raymond was necessary due to an administrative order on the water system but did not halt all development. She stressed the importance of moratoriums as regulated tools for managing local development issues.
SB163: Jason Soren, Amherst Support03:39:19.520 - 12:38:05 PM; Jason Soren supported the bill, arguing that moratoriums represent an extreme form of command and control regulation that can halt valuable development. He discussed the economic inefficiencies of such regulations and suggested that impact fees are a better method for managing development impacts.
SB163: Patricia Bio Oppose03:45:04.479 - 12:43:50 PM; Patricia Bio opposed the bill, describing moratoriums as necessary relief valves for towns facing catastrophic development issues. She mentioned Raymond's experience with unexpected water system strains and the need for immediate response tools.
SB163: Robert McDonald, Raymond Planning Board Oppose03:47:14.359 - 12:46:00 PM; Robert McDonald opposed the bill, questioning its wording regarding planning boards' authority over building permits. He argued that the bill is unnecessary and potentially miswritten, emphasizing the need for local control over development.
SB281: Brody Dease, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose03:53:14.720 - 12:52:00 PM; Brody Dease from the New Hampshire Municipal Association opposed Senate Bill 281, arguing that it would change the current statute that allows flexibility for municipalities to issue building permits on a case-by-case basis. He highlighted that the bill would allow development on Class 6 roads by right, which could lead to development in areas without proper infrastructure, potentially straining municipalities and property owners. He stressed that Class 6 roads were historically used for agricultural purposes and not designed for residential, commercial, or industrial development. He also mentioned the potential for sporadic and unintended development in zoning districts if municipalities cannot update their zoning ordinances.
SB281: Patricia Bio, Raymond Oppose04:00:23.600 - 12:59:09 PM; Patricia Bio from Raymond opposed the bill, citing the town's experience with Class 6 roads. She mentioned that while they have allowed building on these roads, it has been expensive and poses safety and health issues. She noted a case where residents of a neighboring town turned their road over to the town due to maintenance costs, which then caused issues at the intersection with Raymond's Class 6 road. She believes the bill would cause financial hardships for some towns.
SB281: Joe Hayes, Gilmanton and Bow Support04:02:19.760 - 1:01:05 PM; Joe Hayes from Gilmanton and Bow supported the bill but suggested it should be expanded to include pre-existing private roads. He shared his personal experience with a cabin in Bow, where he faced challenges with building permits and inspections. He questioned the feasibility of insurance companies insuring properties on Class 6 roads without proper access for emergency services.
SB281: Robert McDonald, Raymond Planning Board Oppose04:04:44.640 - 1:03:30 PM; Robert McDonald from the Raymond Planning Board opposed the bill, arguing that many towns are already handling Class 6 road development correctly. He mentioned that issuing permits on these roads is costly for taxpayers not living on them and that the current system should not be changed to a blanket policy.
SB281: James Jim Mloud Oppose04:05:40.800 - 1:04:26 PM; James Jim Mloud opposed the bill, stating that it is unnecessary as the current RSA already addresses the issue. He believes the bill is a solution to a non-existent problem.
SB281: Diana Lush, Raymond Oppose04:06:43.520 - 1:05:29 PM; Diana Lush from Raymond opposed the bill, emphasizing that the current regulations and the board of selectmen are doing a good job in managing permits on Class 6 roads. She highlighted the importance of local control and the responsibility of landowners for maintenance, such as snow removal.
SB281: Sharon Monahan Oppose04:08:07.319 - 1:06:53 PM; Sharon Monahan opposed the bill because it would allow building on Class 6 roads by right without municipal administrative approvals or processes. She explained that the bill deletes a section that allows building permits with planning board approval, which she believes is essential for proper development evaluation.
SB281: Randy Marman Oppose04:09:39.600 - 1:08:25 PM; Randy Marman opposed the bill, raising concerns about the potential consequences of development on Class 6 roads. He questioned what would happen if a natural disaster like a beaver dam washing out a road occurred, and whether the town would be responsible for residents' access. He also discussed the possibility of subdividing large parcels into smaller lots, leading to increased pressure on towns to maintain roads, as seen in a neighboring town. He advocated for local control and caution in changing laws that could have unintended consequences.
SB281: Representative Bull Information Only04:12:55.279 - 1:11:41 PM; Representative Bull discusses a hypothetical scenario where a beaver dam causes a class 6 road to wash out, leaving residents stranded. The discussion revolves around the implications for property access and town responsibility in such situations. He clarifies that even if a single driveway is affected, the town would still provide aid, emphasizing the need for controlled development rather than allowing unmitigated development on class 6 roads.
SB281: Representative Thaxton Information Only04:13:58.560 - 1:12:44 PM; Representative Thaxton continues the discussion about the scenario where a beaver dam causes a class 6 road to wash out, questioning the tax revenue implications if 64 households were built at the end of such a road. The discussion highlights the financial burden on the town for infrastructure like culverts, suggesting that the tax revenue from these houses might not cover the costs.
SB282: Senator Keith Murphy Support04:15:18.720 - 1:14:04 PM; Senator Keith Murphy introduces SB282, focusing on reducing the cost of housing through the use of single stairways in multifamily dwellings. He explains that this approach, inspired by trends in Seattle, could lower construction costs and enable building on smaller lots. He discusses the safety measures included in the bill, such as sprinkler systems and fireproof materials, which were developed in consultation with the fire marshal. The bill aims to allow buildings up to four to six stories with a single stairway, primarily in densely populated areas like Manchester and Portsmouth.
SB282: Senator Keith Murphy Support04:19:11.760 - 1:17:57 PM; Senator Murphy continues to discuss the cost savings and safety features of single stairway buildings. He mentions distributing a housing policy explainer but did not include specific percentage savings. He emphasizes the significant impact of stairways on construction costs and space utilization, which could lead to more profitable developments for builders.
SB282: Representative Bullio Information Only04:20:17.840 - 1:19:03 PM; Representative Bullio asks Senator Murphy if the bill would override local height limits. Senator Murphy assures that the bill does not override local control over building height limits.
SB282: Sean Tumi, State Fire Marshal Information Only04:21:20.800 - 1:20:06 PM; State Fire Marshal Sean Tumi testifies about the safety aspects of the proposed bill. He explains that New Hampshire's fire code already allows for four-story buildings with single exit stairs and suggests aligning the building code with the fire code to allow up to four stories under existing safety parameters. He expresses reservations about immediately extending to six stories due to potential safety risks in different communities and recommends a more cautious approach, allowing time for proper amendments to be made to the building and fire codes.
SB282: Representative Kerwin Information Only04:24:02.319 - 1:22:48 PM; Representative Kerwin inquires about recent fire death trends in the state and the effectiveness of sprinklers. Fire Marshal Tumi reports an increase in fire deaths, mainly in one and two-family dwellings, and discusses the importance of maintaining sprinkler systems. He addresses concerns about potential tragedies in buildings with single stairways and the need for proper maintenance and inspections by property owners.
SB282: Representative Bolio Information Only04:27:32.399 - 1:26:18 PM; Representative Bolio asks about the correlation between fire casualties and the age of housing stock. Fire Marshal Tumi notes that while they have not specifically tracked this, fires leading to casualties are typically in older one and two-family dwellings. He discusses the safety of new constructions built to the proposed four-story single stair standard versus older multifamily buildings without modern safety features.
SB282: Representative Miner Information Only04:30:30.720 - 1:29:16 PM; Representative Miner asks if towns have the ability to inspect multifamily units themselves. Fire Marshal Tumi explains that some towns do this currently, but there is pending legislation that might eliminate local amendments to the building and fire codes, potentially affecting this ability.
SB282: Philip Sherman, Building Code Review Board, Licensed Fire Protection Engineer Information Only04:48:10.958 - 1:46:56 PM; Philip Sherman provided insights into the relationship between model codes and New Hampshire's state building codes, emphasizing the need for statutory changes to effectively update building codes. He explained that since the first statewide building code in 2002, New Hampshire has typically adopted codes one edition behind the latest model. He suggested aligning the building code with the fire code to allow single exits up to four stories, and proposed an amendment extending this provision to six stories based on Seattle's model, which was introduced at the board's April meeting with a vote scheduled for May 9th. He also mentioned a minor issue with electrical outlets that needs resolution.
SB282: Dave Emanuel, New Hampshire Association of Fire Chiefs Information Only04:53:38.798 - 1:52:24 PM; Dave Emanuel acknowledged housing challenges in New Hampshire and supported aligning the building codes with state fire codes. He expressed concerns about extending single exit provisions beyond four stories due to safety considerations. He suggested directing the building code review board and the board of fire control to implement necessary code changes for clarity and safety.
SB282: Birdie Daes, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose04:55:32.878 - 1:54:18 PM; Birdie Daes opposed SB282, citing potential safety risks in municipalities due to the bill's provisions for single stairways in multi-family dwellings up to six stories. He pointed out the lack of specificity in the bill regarding residential occupancy classes and warned of the dangers of compromised exits. He argued against the general court writing building codes, suggesting it should be left to the state board and fire control. He also mentioned potential disincentives for municipalities to allow taller buildings due to safety concerns.
SB282: James Mclo, Raymond Oppose05:00:32.240 - 1:59:18 PM; James Mclo opposed SB282, arguing that it prioritizes developer cost savings over safety. He highlighted the impracticality of a single stairwell for safety in multi-story buildings and noted that local fire departments may not be equipped like those in larger cities like Seattle. He used the example of Raymond to illustrate local zoning restrictions and the potential dangers of a single exit, emphasizing the need for secondary egress options.
SB282: Diana Lush, Raymond Oppose05:03:07.600 - 2:01:53 PM; Diana Lush opposed the bill, focusing on the increased exit access travel distance proposed in SB282 compared to Seattle's much shorter distance. She shared a personal experience from working at the Kachico Mills building in Dover, where a single exit caused a dangerous bottleneck during a fire evacuation. She stressed the importance of multiple exits for safety, especially in the context of potential smoke inhalation hazards.
SB282: Robert McDonald, Raymond Oppose05:07:24.638 - 2:06:10 PM; Robert McDonald opposed SB282, citing concerns over local fire department capabilities and zoning based on fire truck reach. He also questioned the calculation of potential rental income loss as a justification for the bill, asserting that developers should design buildings to maximize units within existing zoning without sacrificing safety.
SB282: Nick Taylor, Director of Housing Action New Hampshire Support05:08:56.400 - 2:07:42 PM; Nick Taylor expressed support for the single stair concept in SB282. He noted that this reform is gaining popularity across 17 states, with various approaches to implementation. He argued that the concept allows for more housing on smaller lots safely, supported by the fire marshall's views. He countered safety concerns by stating significant advancements in safety regulations over the last 50 years. He also addressed aesthetic concerns about multifamily housing, suggesting that the current code limits design diversity. He referenced a study by Pew on construction costs related to the second stair, and emphasized that the bill does not override local zoning on height. He concluded by supporting the four-story limit and suggested a commission for studying higher implementations.
SB282: Ryan Cash, Chief of the Manchester Fire Department Support05:13:14.160 - 2:12:00 PM; Chief Ryan Cash from Manchester Fire Department spoke in support of SB282, emphasizing the goal of making housing more affordable in New Hampshire. He supports the bill's approach to four-story buildings with a single stairwell but expressed operational concerns about extending this to six stories without further review. He assured willingness to work towards a safe solution and highlighted the impact of cost of living on recruiting and retaining firefighters in his community.
SB284 2025-1556H: Chairman Vote05:15:11.760 - 2:13:57 PM; The Chairman opened an executive session on SB284 and moved an ought to pass motion with amendment 2025-1556H. The amendment was previously passed and sent to the other body, which made changes. The committee voted to reassert the original amendment with a vote of 14 to 1, and the bill, as amended, was set to go on the consent calendar.
SB91: Chairman Vote05:17:47.600 - 2:16:33 PM; The Chairman moved an ought to pass motion on SB91, which was seconded by Representative Paige. The bill aims to streamline processes and save property owners money by eliminating redundant mailing requirements. The vote passed unanimously with 15 to 0, and the bill was set to go on the consent calendar.
SB170: Senator Keith Murphy, District 16 Support05:19:34.798 - 2:18:20 PM; Senator Keith Murphy introduced SB170, emphasizing its origin from housing roundtables that identified obstacles to housing development. He detailed the amendment's provisions, including preventing municipalities from mandating that housing occupants be related, not requiring more stringent well or septic system requirements than those set by DES, not limiting road length to impede development, not capping the number of housing lots on dead-end streets, allowing utilities in open spaces or buffers, limiting planning boards to one review cycle, and restricting excessive setback requirements. He expressed openness to further amendments to address educational status as a protected class under the Fair Housing Act.
SB170: James Mloud, Raymond Oppose05:25:52.320 - 2:24:38 PM; James Mloud from Raymond expressed opposition to SB170, citing its overly broad approach. He highlighted concerns about the bill's impact on conservation development, allowing infrastructure in protected open spaces, potentially negating the purpose of such developments. He also criticized the bill for turning minimum state standards into maximums, which he argued goes against local zoning rights. Mloud further stated that the requirement for quick approval of changes by developers is impractical and potentially harmful to community interests.
SB170: Dennis Demers, Hooksett Support05:36:12.080 - 2:34:58 PM; Dennis Demers from Hooksett supports the legislation to amend local subdivision and development design regulations, specifically to eliminate road length restrictions. He explains that current Hooksett regulations limit road lengths to 1,200 feet from a through road, a restriction that was set in 1957. This rule, according to Demers, limits housing development and is outdated given the current capabilities of municipal services like DPW, fire departments, and police. He argues that eliminating these restrictions in his section of Hooksett could open up 500 acres for development, which is crucial for addressing housing needs. He mentions that current impact fees already account for the increased demand on municipal services, suggesting the road length restrictions are used more as a tool to limit growth rather than for safety.
SB170: Joanie McIntyre, Past President of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors Support05:38:56.718 - 2:37:42 PM; Joanie McIntyre, representing the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, supports the bill, emphasizing the severity of the housing crisis in New Hampshire. She provides statistics showing a drastic reduction in available homes for sale and a significant increase in median home prices over the years. McIntyre stresses the need for towns to stop limiting development to address the housing shortage, which affects workforce availability, including for essential services like fire departments. She argues that increasing lot sizes and property prices are not solutions to the housing crisis and urges support for the bill to increase housing supply.
SB170: Tim Thompson, Assistant Community Development Director, City of Concord Oppose05:46:49.920 - 2:45:35 PM; Tim Thompson, representing the City of Concord, expressed significant concerns about Senate Bill 170. He highlighted two major issues: the requirement of a 50-foot frontage for residential lots and the 'one bite at the apple' policy for planning board reviews. He argued that the frontage requirement could lead to safety issues and impractical lot sizes for wells and septic systems, particularly in urban settings like Concord. He also criticized the unclear language in the bill regarding the planning board process, suggesting it could complicate development timelines and impact community safety and infrastructure. Thompson recommended further study on the bill before moving forward and specifically requested the elimination of the 50-foot frontage requirement and the three-day turnaround for planning board reviews.
SB170: Brody Deay, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose05:51:49.400 - 2:50:35 PM; Brody Deay, representing the New Hampshire Municipal Association, opposed Senate Bill 170 due to several technical errors and problematic mandates on municipalities. He highlighted the bill's failure to address affordability and its potential to burden municipal planners and departments. Deay discussed specific sections of the bill, including zoning mandates, soil and slope considerations, and regulations on dead-end roads and utilities. He emphasized that the bill could lead to poor planning, safety issues, and conflicts with existing statutes. He urged the committee to vote the bill inexpedient to legislate and suggested potential negotiations on certain provisions if necessary.
SB170: Robert McDonald, Raymond Oppose06:03:45.638 - 3:02:31 PM; Robert McDonald from Raymond opposed Senate Bill 170, echoing previous concerns and adding that the bill would not help build more housing. He cited an example of a townhouse development in Raymond where only a fraction of approved units were built due to cost issues, suggesting that the bill's mandates would not address the underlying affordability problem.
SB170: Patricia Burgio Oppose06:05:06.280 - 3:03:52 PM; Patricia Burgio requested the committee to table Senate Bill 170 for further study, citing the potential financial and environmental costs to towns. She mentioned ongoing developments in her town that do not align with the data provided by proponents of the bill. Burgio expressed concerns about the bill's impact on local control, environmental regulations, and the financial burden it would place on citizens, suggesting that more consultation with individual towns is needed before moving forward.
SB170: Matt Mayberry, New Hampshire Homebuilders Support06:08:43.520 - 3:07:29 PM; Matt Mayberry from the New Hampshire Homebuilders supported Senate Bill 170, arguing that it addresses the inconsistency between local and state regulations and the timeliness of the approval process. He proposed an amendment to clarify the language around the 'one bite at the apple' policy, emphasizing the need for a more streamlined process to prevent developers from being delayed by continuous revisions. Mayberry also highlighted the benefits of shared utilities in clustered developments and the importance of empowering landowners over planning boards.
SB170: DJ Burke, Business and Industry Association, New Hampshire Statewide Chamber of Commerce, and Manufacturing Association Support06:16:28.280 - 3:15:14 PM; DJ Burke, representing several business organizations, supported Senate Bill 170, stating that it addresses the cost and timeliness issues frequently mentioned by the building community. He emphasized that the bill could streamline the approval process and reduce the regulatory burden on builders, which would help address housing needs in the state.
SB165: Grant Bossi, New Hampshire Senate, on behalf of Senator Kevin Avard Support06:18:02.400 - 3:16:48 PM; Grant Bossi introduced Senate Bill 165 on behalf of Senator Kevin Avard, aiming to adjust the financial review and audit thresholds for Resident Owned Communities (ROCs). The bill proposes to raise the threshold for mandatory audits from $250,000 to $1 million in annual revenue, requiring an internal financial audit for ROCs under $1 million. ROCs with revenue between $1 million and $2 million would have the option for a financial review, while those over $2 million would still need a full audit. This change is intended to reduce the financial burden on smaller ROCs without state subsidies.
SB165: Abby Bronson, New Hampshire Community Loan Fund Support06:20:23.040 - 3:19:09 PM; Abby Bronson from the New Hampshire Community Loan Fund spoke in support of Senate Bill 165. She explained that the bill aims to update the audit threshold, which has not been revised in 35 years. The current threshold of $100,000 is outdated and burdensome for smaller manufactured home communities, with audits costing up to $10,000. Bronson highlighted that a smaller review, costing about $5,000, provides similar services to a full financial audit. She emphasized that the proposed increase to $2 million would align these communities with other nonprofits and reduce costs significantly for residents, who face an additional $300 annually per home under the current threshold. Bronson also noted that some communities struggle to find accountants willing to conduct audits due to the low threshold, and updating it would help cut red tape and lower housing costs while maintaining necessary checks.