Committee Summary for House Finance Division I (03/21/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB2 2024-211h 00:06:02.400 - 12:20:03 PM	Executive Session	relative to state fees, funds, revenues, and expenditures.	Weyler, Kenneth(R)[B+]2024

HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:06:02.400 - 12:20:03 PM; The speaker discusses the ongoing discussions about HB2 and mentions that they are waiting for more information on how much money will be available for allocation, specifically mentioning that this will be known by Tuesday. They confirm a meeting time for Tuesday at 3:00 PM and express a desire to move forward with approving Mr. Bucky's budget.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:08:11.440 - 12:22:12 PM; The speaker discusses the amendment 211h to HB2, which involves moving money from the renewable energy fund to the general fund for the biennium. They mention ongoing discussions with the Department of Energy to determine the exact amount, which is estimated to be between 13 and 20 million dollars. They also clarify changes in the language of the bill concerning incentive payments and the transfer of funds.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Griffin Support00:13:33.120 - 12:27:34 PM; Representative Griffin moves to approve amendment 211h to HB2.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Campbell Support00:13:33.120 - 12:27:34 PM; Representative Campbell seconds the motion to approve amendment 211h to HB2.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:13:33.120 - 12:27:34 PM; The speaker discusses the vote on amendment 211h, which passes with a vote of 5 to 4.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:15:11.120 - 12:29:12 PM; The speaker introduces the next discussion on the Governor's Scholarship Fund, mentioning that the uncommitted funds in the program amount to 1.6 million dollars. They discuss the possibility of eliminating the program and the financial implications.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Campbell Information Only00:15:11.120 - 12:29:12 PM; Representative Campbell seeks clarification on the uncommitted funds in the Governor's Scholarship Fund, understanding that the unrestricted balance at the end of 2024 was 7.1 million, with anticipated expenditures and fiscal year allocations affecting the remaining balance.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Oppose00:16:26.399 - 12:30:27 PM; Representative R expresses opposition to repealing the Governor's Scholarship Fund, highlighting its benefits to New Hampshire students and schools, and its role in maintaining high curriculum and behavioral standards.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Mun Oppose00:17:36.480 - 12:31:37 PM; Representative Mun supports Representative R's opposition to eliminating the scholarship program, emphasizing the need to refine the program to make it more accessible and beneficial for New Hampshire students.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Campbell Oppose00:17:36.480 - 12:31:37 PM; Representative Campbell clarifies that they agreed to remove funding for the next two years but did not agree to repeal the entire program, stating they will not vote to repeal it.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Wiler Information Only00:18:45.760 - 12:32:46 PM; Representative Wiler inquires about the average scholarship amount provided by the program, noting that the scholarships range from 1,000 to 2,000 dollars per student and last for four years, questioning the impact given rising tuition costs.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Muns Oppose00:19:34.799 - 12:33:35 PM; Representative Muns agrees with Representative Wiler's concerns about the scholarship amount but stresses the importance of improving the program rather than eliminating it.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Rang Support00:19:34.799 - 12:33:35 PM; Representative Rang supports the scholarship program, highlighting its needs-based nature and the significance of even small amounts of financial aid for some families.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Unnamed Information Only00:20:23.720 - 12:34:24 PM; The speaker proposes a new rule among Republicans to find equivalent savings elsewhere in the budget before stopping any savings measures.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Unnamed Information Only00:20:23.720 - 12:34:24 PM; The speaker moves amendment 1048, which is seconded by Representative Sweeney. The amendment does not pass, with a vote of 4 in favor and 5 opposed.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Maguire Information Only00:22:11.440 - 12:36:12 PM; Representative Maguire discusses an HB1 amendment related to a program involving the Judicial Council and Franklin Pierce, which provided funding for a clinic that cleared numerous cases.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:23:00.919 - 12:37:01 PM; The speaker discusses the allocation of $100,000 specifically for a program run by the Judicial Council. They express the importance of this funding, suggesting it could clear a significant number of cases and provide training for future criminal attorneys. The speaker mentions the possibility of matching this funding with another $100,000 from another budget line, emphasizing the return on investment. They clarify a mistake in their earlier statement, correcting it to say 'Judicial Council' instead of 'Judicial Branch'.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:24:15.840 - 12:38:16 PM; The speaker elaborates on the $100,000 budget increase, noting that the funds were originally ARPA money used for a criminal justice clinic at Franklin Pierce Law School in collaboration with the Judicial Council. They highlight the clinic's success in clearing 323 cases in nine months, the cost-effectiveness compared to using contract or assigned attorneys, and the training benefits for law students. The speaker mentions that the money is within a budget line of $24.6 million, indicating a budget reduction.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:25:42.320 - 12:39:43 PM; The speaker continues discussing the $100,000 increase in the Judicial Council's budget, specifically for the class line 108 for provider payments legal service. They mention that the amendment would increase this line by $100,000, despite the governor's budget showing a reduced amount from previous years. They emphasize the value of the clinical program in clearing case backlogs and training attorneys, suggesting it's a cost-effective solution compared to other methods.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:26:51.840 - 12:40:52 PM; The speaker discusses the specifics of the HB1 amendment, which involves increasing the class 108 line by $100,000. They clarify that the governor's budget had reduced the amount from previous years and that the clinical program, previously funded by ARPA money, was effective and cost-efficient. They suggest that without this funding, cases would end up at fiscal due to constitutional requirements, and advocate for the $100,000 allocation.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:28:10.960 - 12:42:11 PM; The speaker further elaborates on the benefits of the clinical program, highlighting its role in clearing case backlogs and training attorneys. They emphasize the cost-effectiveness of using law students compared to full-blown cases, suggesting that $100,000 is a small amount that could prevent larger fiscal costs. They propose adding a footnote to HB1 to ensure the money is used for this program.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:29:35.360 - 12:43:36 PM; The speaker moves an amendment to add $100,000 to the Judicial Council's budget under class 108, which is seconded by another representative. They discuss potential additional changes to the Judicial Council's budget, referencing agency request documents and additional funding requests from the Judicial Council, including a request for $22-23 million per year.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:30:48.080 - 12:44:49 PM; The speaker clarifies the Judicial Council's additional funding requests, mentioning a discrepancy between the governor's proposal and the efficiency budget. They note that this discrepancy could lead to higher costs in the future if not addressed, particularly affecting the public defender program and leading to increased spending on assigned counsel.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:31:44.320 - 12:45:45 PM; The speaker discusses the Judicial Council's request for additional funding, focusing on a discrepancy between the governor's budget and the efficiency budget, which could lead to higher future costs. They explain that the public defender program needs predictable funding to staff offices effectively, and without it, cases would be handled by assigned counsel, increasing costs.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:32:56.480 - 12:46:57 PM; The speaker reiterates the importance of addressing the budget discrepancy for the Judicial Council, emphasizing the financial implications of not doing so. They discuss the potential for higher costs if the public defender program is cut, leading to more cases handled by assigned counsel, which is more expensive.
HB2 2024-211h: Mr. Bucky Information Only00:33:53.679 - 12:47:54 PM; Mr. Bucky discusses a specific funding request from the Judicial Council, focusing on a discrepancy between the governor's proposal and the efficiency budget. He explains that this discrepancy could lead to higher costs in the future, particularly in rural counties where assigned counsel would have to handle cases that the public defender would otherwise take.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:34:44.719 - 12:48:45 PM; The speaker discusses the discrepancy in the Judicial Council's budget, attributing it to a mistake in the governor's budget calculations. They explain that the efficiency budget was intended to be higher, and the discrepancy could lead to increased costs if not addressed. They discuss the potential for higher assigned counsel costs if the public defender program is underfunded.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:35:52.480 - 12:49:53 PM; The speaker discusses the discrepancy in the Judicial Council's budget, noting that it was due to a mistake in the governor's budget calculations. They emphasize the need to address this discrepancy to avoid higher future costs, particularly in relation to the public defender program and assigned counsel.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:36:58.480 - 12:50:59 PM; The speaker discusses the potential budgetary implications of not addressing the discrepancy in the Judicial Council's budget. They note that underfunding the public defender program could lead to higher costs due to increased reliance on assigned counsel, particularly in rural areas.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:38:00.960 - 12:52:01 PM; The speaker discusses the relationship between the public defender program and assigned counsel, emphasizing that underfunding the public defender could lead to higher costs due to increased reliance on assigned counsel. They discuss the possibility of moving money from the assigned counsel line to the public defender line to save money in the long run.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:39:18.240 - 12:53:19 PM; The speaker discusses the history and current state of the Judicial Council's budget lines, noting that case loads are increasing and that the end of felonies first has led to higher time needs and expenditures. They discuss the governor's intent to increase the public defender program and the need to address the budget discrepancy.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:40:31.440 - 12:54:32 PM; The speaker discusses the budget discrepancy and the need to address it to avoid higher future costs. They note that the public defender program is significantly larger than the assigned counsel line, and that underfunding the public defender could lead to increased reliance on assigned counsel, which is more expensive.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:41:43.040 - 12:55:44 PM; The speaker discusses the constitutional right to an attorney and the potential for higher costs if the Judicial Council's budget discrepancy is not addressed. They note that the current budget is significantly lower than what was spent in previous years, and that addressing the discrepancy could prevent higher future costs.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:43:04.480 - 12:57:05 PM; The speaker discusses the need to add a footnote to HB1 to ensure that the $100,000 is used for the clinical program. They clarify that a vote can be taken to add the footnote without needing an amendment, and that the budget will be increased by $1.792796 million in fiscal year 2027.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:44:09.720 - 12:58:10 PM; The speaker discusses the vote to increase the Judicial Council's budget by $3.5 million and add a footnote to HB1. They clarify that the increase will be made to the public defender program line, and that the overall budget will still be lower than what was spent in 2024.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:45:06.800 - 12:59:07 PM; The speaker confirms the vote to increase the Judicial Council's budget by $3.5 million and add a footnote to HB1. They clarify that the increase will be made to the public defender program line for both fiscal years 2026 and 2027, and that the vote is unanimous.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only00:46:26.640 - 1:00:27 PM; The speaker discusses amendment 1161, which involves taking $1.6 million from the governor's scholarship fund but continuing the program. They confirm that the program will stay alive despite the budget changes, and the amendment is moved and seconded.
HB2 2024-211h: Unidentified Representative Information Only00:47:16.720 - 1:01:17 PM; The representative discussed the fees related to generator, automotive, hazardous, and hazardous waste, which were previously approved. These fees are now being put into statute to make them effective. The representative clarified that they would vote on these amendments as a whole, as they have the amendment in front of them, unlike the previous temporary vote. They corrected the page numbers for the fees from pages 5-10 to 6-11 and moved to accept these pages.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Information Only00:48:40.559 - 1:02:41 PM; Representative Sweeney sought clarification that the current vote does not include the new solid waste fee, which is a separate matter. The response confirmed that the vote was for minor fee increases across various categories, and the solid waste fee would be handled separately.
HB2 2024-211h: Unidentified Representative Information Only00:49:26.000 - 1:03:27 PM; The representative introduced amendment 1246h, which was one of the amendments handed out. They discussed the fees related to pesticide applicators, fertilizers, maple products, and a new scale aspect, noting that pet vendor fees would be handled through rules rather than statutes.
HB2 2024-211h: Unidentified Representative Information Only00:51:31.440 - 1:05:32 PM; The representative clarified that the pet vendor fee would be a new fee handled through rules for agriculture, not through the statute, and confirmed an increase of roughly $3 million in the general fund and $1.2 million in other funds from the amendments. They moved to accept these amendments for agriculture fee increases.
HB2 2024-211h: Unidentified Representative Information Only00:52:51.040 - 1:06:52 PM; The representative discussed the agriculture budget, noting that it was fully staffed and all positions seemed useful. They moved to approve the agriculture budget as is, and it was unanimously accepted.
HB2 2024-211h: Unidentified Representative Information Only00:54:15.839 - 1:08:16 PM; The representative introduced the judicial branch's amendments, noting the removal of a $25 search charge from the statute to be included in rules. They confirmed there would be no increased revenue from this change but it would align with other fee structures. They also mentioned upcoming fee increases set in rules that would add $2.7 million to the general fund.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative McGuire Information Only00:56:47.440 - 1:10:48 PM; Representative McGuire discussed the judicial branch's budget, noting a planned back of the budget cut. They explained that the governor had cut the judicial branch's budget by $6 million over the biennium, and they proposed an additional $10 million cut, with $5.5 million coming from fee increases. This would result in a total of $10.5 million back of the budget cut, representing a 4.5% cut per year from the governor's budget.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only00:59:59.839 - 1:14:00 PM; The speaker discussed the budget increase for the judicial branch, suggesting it would be around a hundred, possibly five to six million more than the fiscal year 2024 actual for each year. They mentioned concerns about potential cuts leading to the suspension of jury trials and the closure of courthouses, specifically mentioning Andover and Claremont as potential closure sites. Security issues were also highlighted as a concern with further budget cuts.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:00:47.960 - 1:14:48 PM; The speaker mentioned receiving conflicting information about possible cuts within the judicial branch, particularly in the clerks' office. They believed there was room for cuts in areas like scheduling and mentioned the replacement of the head of the administrative office of the courts due to poor performance. They expressed comfort with the proposed budget increase despite it being higher than the 2024 actual spending.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Leechman Oppose01:02:13.760 - 1:16:14 PM; Representative Leechman corrected the classification of the judicial branch as a branch of government, not an agency. They agreed with most suggested cuts but opposed further cuts to the judicial branch's budget, citing the need for security and the ongoing issues with the Youth Development Center (YDC) cases. They mentioned the addition of a judge in the last budget and could not support cuts beyond what the governor suggested.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:03:26.160 - 1:17:27 PM; The speaker mentioned an available amendment to Division Two that would involve placing slot machines in bars to generate revenue. They noted that this revenue would be directed to the education trust fund, potentially affecting other education funding. They also discussed the governor's decision not to fund the YDC settlement in the budget, suggesting it was a deliberate choice made in consultation with the attorney general.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Campbell Information Only01:04:17.640 - 1:18:18 PM; Representative Campbell inquired about the statutory obligation to provide $75 million annually to the YDC settlement. It was clarified that the statute allows the YDC to request up to $75 million per year, but there is no statutory requirement to fund that amount. The speaker suggested minimal funding to keep the account active but opposed funding the full $75 million annually.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:05:55.680 - 1:19:56 PM; The speaker discussed the possibility of delaying payments on YDC settlements with interest, suggesting that recipients would have to agree to this or receive nothing. They questioned the feasibility of delaying payments for two years and paying interest starting then, and mentioned previous discussions about borrowing on top of borrowing. The conversation then shifted back to the judicial budget.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:05:55.680 - 1:19:56 PM; The speaker was finishing their discussion about the budget, particularly regarding cuts to the judicial branch. They emphasized the importance of considering the Attorney General's and Chief Justice's insights over informal conversations about court efficiencies. They expressed reluctance to support additional cuts to the judicial branch due to its separate status and the significant impact of budget cuts as presented by the judicial branch.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:07:04.000 - 1:21:05 PM; The speaker continued the discussion on the budget, specifically focusing on the judicial branch. They mentioned voting on amendment 1245h, which was related to budget cuts, and also discussed the proposed fee increases and amendment 1158, which would remove a $25 surcharge. The speaker suggested voting on these amendments separately due to differing opinions on each.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:09:06.719 - 1:23:07 PM; The speaker facilitated a vote on amendment 1245h, which passed with a vote of 5 to 4. They then moved to vote on amendment 1158 and the fee increases separately, which passed unanimously. The speaker then transitioned to discussing the Hampton Beach Commission.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:10:36.640 - 1:24:37 PM; The speaker discussed House Bill related to the Hampton Beach Commission, which requested $5,000 annually. They noted that the commission had operated without this funding for 25 years. They introduced an amendment to HB2 to make the commission's functions optional and subject to available funds, as suggested by former Representative Emmerick.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative from Hampton Oppose01:11:49.920 - 1:25:50 PM; The representative expressed opposition to the amendment for the Hampton Beach Commission. They emphasized the commission's role as a state agency established by the legislature, which has been operating with minimal funds and relies on volunteers and donations. They highlighted the importance of the commission in implementing the finalized master plan and the challenges of doing so without funding.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Support01:14:09.920 - 1:28:10 PM; Representative Sweeney proposed amendment 2025-1224h, which would authorize the Department of Transportation (DOT) to sell or lease non-turnpike rest areas and welcome centers for commercial purposes. They mentioned that the sale proceeds would go to the highway fund, while the savings from employee costs would benefit the general fund.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Evil Information Only01:16:18.800 - 1:30:19 PM; Representative Evil raised concerns about potential conflicts with federal law regarding the commercialization of rest areas. They suggested amending the proposal to include a clause that it would be subject to federal law, which would make them more comfortable in supporting the amendment.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Oppose01:18:46.880 - 1:32:47 PM; Representative R opposed the amendment to sell rest areas, viewing it as an 11th-hour attempt to generate funds without sufficient analysis. They emphasized the need for more detailed studies and fiscal analysis before selling state assets and suggested forming a committee to review the proposal more thoroughly.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Evil Support01:20:04.800 - 1:34:05 PM; Representative Evil expressed comfort with the idea of selling rest areas but reiterated the need for an amendment to ensure compliance with federal law. They also discussed the historical context of the management shift of rest areas from DOT to the Bureau of Economic Affairs (BEA) due to its tourism-related function.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Wiler Information Only01:21:08.800 - 1:35:09 PM; Representative Wiler questioned the funding source for rest area employees, noting that they are funded by the general fund despite the revenue going to the transportation fund. They suggested aligning the funding source with where the revenue is directed.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Griffin Information Only01:22:20.320 - 1:36:21 PM; Representative Griffin supported the idea of aligning the funding of rest area employees with the transportation fund, where the revenue is directed. They also discussed the strain on the highway fund due to the lack of gas tax increases.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Support01:23:10.760 - 1:37:11 PM; Representative Sweeney agreed to Representative Evil's suggestion to amend the proposal to comply with federal law. They emphasized that the amendment was part of a package to sell the lands and recognize general fund savings from operating costs.
HB2 2024-211h: Melissa Information Only01:24:23.440 - 1:38:24 PM; Melissa raised concerns about the financial implications of the amendment if the rest areas were not sold or leased by the specified date. She questioned whether the positions should be removed if the sale or lease did not occur, suggesting a need for clarity in the amendment.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Run Information Only01:25:31.760 - 1:39:32 PM; Representative Run expressed concerns about the tight timeline for selling or leasing the rest areas, especially if municipalities were involved. They highlighted the need for surveys and other preparatory work, which could take a year, and questioned the practicality of the deadline.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Information Only01:26:02.080 - 1:40:03 PM; Representative Sweeney discussed the rationale behind stopping the process by July 1st, aiming to remove the operational costs of the welcome center from the second year of the biennium. They clarified that the goal was to force the sale of the centers to avoid funding their operations in the next biennium, specifically mentioning a savings of $2.3 million in general funds for fiscal year 27.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only01:27:17.520 - 1:41:18 PM; The speaker raised a concern about what would happen if the sites were not sold by July 1st, suggesting a provision to allow sales to continue into August or September. They emphasized the need for a strict timeline for sales, with a drop-dead close date of July 1st, 2026, to avoid funding operations beyond that date.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Run Information Only01:28:23.679 - 1:42:24 PM; Representative Run distinguished between operational costs and the value of the real estate asset. They suggested that while operational costs could be cut, maintaining ownership of the real estate could be beneficial. They proposed leasing the properties to retain the asset value while transferring operational costs.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Information Only01:29:31.600 - 1:43:32 PM; Representative Sweeney responded to Representative Run's point about real estate as an asset versus operational costs. They proposed an amendment to remove operational costs as of July 1st, 2025, to save nearly $5 million over two fiscal years, while allowing the Department of Transportation (DOT) to continue selling the properties under the 2009 law.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only01:30:37.760 - 1:44:38 PM; The speaker expressed caution about selling land without thorough analysis, emphasizing the difference between operational costs and capital assets. They mentioned the need for more information on staffing and the implications of closing the centers.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Camros Information Only01:31:41.199 - 1:45:42 PM; Representative Camros pointed out that selling the land would not only generate revenue but also increase property taxes for the state and local areas, highlighting the potential value of the real estate.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Eagle Information Only01:31:41.199 - 1:45:42 PM; Representative Eagle mentioned the possibility of selling or leasing the properties and requested clarification on federal law compliance. They also requested a list of the centers involved in the discussion.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Magguire Information Only01:32:38.320 - 1:46:39 PM; Representative Magguire discussed an amendment related to the Public Employee Labor Relations Board (PELRB), explaining that it was intended to match a line item in the budget for board member payments. They outlined a plan to fill a vacant position and assign additional work to handle personnel appeals and the Right to Know Ombudsman, aiming for a small savings.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only01:37:29.920 - 1:51:30 PM; The speaker discussed an amendment related to the Department of Employment Security, focusing on grants funded by an additional $6 million in unemployment insurance payments. They proposed eliminating a specific grant program for employer training, arguing it was not cost-effective and benefited only a small number of employers.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Wrong Information Only01:41:16.320 - 1:55:17 PM; Representative Wrong supported the idea of cutting the employer training grant, arguing that employers should bear the cost of specific job training. They also supported funding for community colleges and programs for disabled individuals.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Months Information Only01:42:27.199 - 1:56:28 PM; Representative Months questioned the effectiveness of the employer training program, suggesting that the low participation rate might be due to insufficient promotion. They advocated for improving existing programs to address workforce shortages rather than eliminating them.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative W Information Only01:43:40.880 - 1:57:41 PM; Representative W disagreed with the idea of funding employer training through unemployment insurance, arguing that it unfairly burdens small businesses. They supported the idea of cutting the program, citing the example of a community college course that did not fully train machinists.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only01:46:45.199 - 2:00:46 PM; The speaker discussed an amendment related to waste management and paid family medical leave, highlighting potential savings of $1.4 million per year. They explained that the state's funding of the program allows it to be offered statewide, with most of the cost going to the insurer rather than state employees.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Oppose01:48:55.440 - 2:02:56 PM; The speaker expressed opposition to getting rid of a benefit, emphasizing its importance as a safety net for families, particularly for women having children or caring for seriously ill parents. They also mentioned concerns about the impact on state revenue due to a tax on premiums for the program, which is collected by the state.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Oppose01:50:06.880 - 2:04:07 PM; Representative R mentioned a tax credit against business taxes for employees offering the program and noted the lack of comprehensive data on its effectiveness due to recent implementation. They also recalled a previous legislative decision to remove the responsibility to market the program, which was part of House Bill 517.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Leechman Oppose01:51:11.440 - 2:05:12 PM; Representative Leechman highlighted the importance of the benefit as pushed by a former governor for state employees, indicating reluctance to remove it as it could negatively impact workforce management and morale.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Griffin Oppose01:52:11.920 - 2:06:12 PM; Representative Griffin expressed reluctance to remove the benefit without the governor's consent, emphasizing the potential to create barriers for the governor in managing the workforce. They also mentioned the financial implications of the amendment and the need for the governor's input.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Wiler Information Only01:53:09.280 - 2:07:10 PM; Representative Wiler inquired about statistics on the usage of the program, particularly by non-state employees, and expressed concern about the program's cost-effectiveness and potential discontinuation if state support was removed.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Oppose01:54:29.280 - 2:08:30 PM; The speaker opposed repealing the program but supported removing the responsibility to market it, citing potential savings. They referenced House Bill 517, which removed the marketing responsibility, and noted it was on the consent calendar for the next week.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only01:56:30.000 - 2:10:31 PM; The speaker discussed House Bill 707 related to landfill placement and water rights, noting it was a member request and part of the house position. They mentioned ongoing discussions with the governor's office about the bill.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Support01:57:15.440 - 2:11:16 PM; The speaker supported House Bill 707, stating it enhances rules for landfill site locations, making them more rigid. They mentioned discussions with Representative Patanza about the bill.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Information Only01:58:28.159 - 2:12:29 PM; Representative R raised concerns about a provision in the bill requiring the hiring of a hydrogeologist who has never worked with applicants, questioning its feasibility due to the limited pool of experts. They suggested addressing this with the Senate.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Griffin Information Only01:59:45.520 - 2:13:46 PM; Representative Griffin expressed concerns about the financial implications and the broad authority given to the commissioner in the bill. They questioned the necessity of the amendment and its alignment with legislative responsibilities.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only02:00:43.840 - 2:14:44 PM; The speaker discussed the strategic advantage of including the amendment in House Bill 2 for negotiation with the Senate, acknowledging it as a member request and part of the house position.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Information Only02:03:02.599 - 2:17:03 PM; Representative R reiterated concerns about the amendment, emphasizing the need for discussion and potential amendments due to its inclusion in House Bill 2 without prior feedback from relevant agencies.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Support02:04:20.080 - 2:18:21 PM; The speaker supported the amendment in House Bill 2, highlighting its environmental benefits and bipartisan support. They noted the strategic advantage of including it in House Bill 2 for negotiation with the Senate.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Leechman Information Only02:05:29.520 - 2:19:30 PM; Representative Leechman sought clarification on the rules assignment in the amendment and expressed concerns about the potential impact of overly restrictive landfill regulations on interstate waste management.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Information Only02:06:38.400 - 2:20:39 PM; The speaker suggested inviting Representative Aaron to discuss the amendment further and expressed philosophical concerns about including it in House Bill 2 as a form of legislative gamemanship.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:08:52.639 - 2:22:53 PM; The speaker discusses a proposed amendment to repeal the Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA), mentioning the complexity due to the BTLA being referenced in 90 different sections of law. The speaker notes that the amendment was drafted without needing further policy decisions from them, indicating it's a generic amendment. They also mention that the BTLA handles about 100 cases a year and proposes a three-month period to stop accepting new cases and finish existing ones before dissolution, which would save approximately $2.3 million.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Leechman Oppose02:11:24.719 - 2:25:25 PM; Representative Leechman expresses concern about the amendment, particularly the increased burden on the judicial branch due to the dissolution of the BTLA. They mention that the judicial branch is already facing budget cuts and worries about the additional responsibilities.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Vinnie Information Only02:12:38.079 - 2:26:39 PM; Representative Vinnie discusses a previous amendment that aimed to consolidate several boards and expand the land use docket to handle tax and commercial issues. They mention the potential need for additional judges and the uncertainty around the status of magistrates, suggesting a need for further discussion and planning.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Support02:14:33.239 - 2:28:34 PM; The speaker supports the amendment to dissolve the BTLA, citing cost savings of nearly $2.4 million annually and the need to achieve budget goals despite not being financially flush. They move to pass the amendment.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Oppose02:15:24.920 - 2:29:25 PM; The speaker echoes Representative Leechman's concerns about the financial and docket burdens on the court system due to the amendment and states they will vote against it.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Vote02:15:24.920 - 2:29:25 PM; A vote is taken on the amendment, resulting in 6 votes in favor and 3 opposed.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:16:11.159 - 2:30:12 PM; The speaker clarifies that the dissolution of the BTLA is not due to poor performance but rather high costs. They mention a poor performance audit related to the Human Rights Commission and propose an amendment to sunset the commission, allowing cases to move directly to court without additional fees or statute of limitations issues.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:16:56.718 - 2:30:57 PM; The speaker discussed the potential for more cases going to the superior and supreme court and supported Representative Sweeney's idea of adding a judge. They mentioned needing to review numbers at the end of the day to decide on amendments for the additional judge. They noted that a detailed handout was prepared and needed approval from the division before drafting the amendment.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:18:02.799 - 2:32:03 PM; The speaker mentioned that a document would be available for discussion on Monday, indicating that they would have a better idea of their financial position by the end of the weekend. They noted the request from group two members for additional resources and the need to discuss potential additions based on their financial standing.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:19:20.160 - 2:33:21 PM; The speaker discussed the number of cases handled by the BTLA, mentioning that around 100 cases a year are dealt with, with many settling before reaching a decision. They also mentioned the Human Rights Commission, noting a large backlog despite increased staff, and discussed the budget implications of these bodies.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:20:36.640 - 2:34:37 PM; The speaker expressed no problem with eliminating the Human Rights Commission but highlighted potential politicization, noting that most cases are labor-related. They discussed the idea of merging it with the labor department, which was considered but did not gain traction. They also mentioned the budget implications, with a cost of three and a half million for the biennium.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:22:04.359 - 2:36:05 PM; The speaker supported Representative Wiler's point about the Human Rights Commission, noting that most cases are labor-related and that other agencies could handle these complaints. They advocated for the complete repeal of the commission due to mismanagement.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:23:25.920 - 2:37:26 PM; The speaker asked for data on the percentage of cases at the Human Rights Commission that were labor-related versus school-related, mentioning past experiences with the commission when on a school board. They questioned if the Department of Education could handle school-related cases if the commission was moved under labor.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:24:45.439 - 2:38:46 PM; The speaker provided data from an audit showing the breakdown of cases at the Human Rights Commission, with the majority being employment-related. They noted a motion to accept an amendment to House Bill 2, and discussed the financial implications if the commission's responsibilities were shifted to the labor department.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:26:08.240 - 2:40:09 PM; The speaker discussed the budget implications of shifting responsibilities to the labor department, noting that labor might need to assume some costs. They clarified that even if labor used non-general fund funds, it would still impact the general fund.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:26:57.960 - 2:40:58 PM; The speaker mentioned that the Department of Justice's budget had more than doubled over the past six years, making it difficult to decide on cuts. They noted the department's role in giving grants and suggested removing these grants to focus the department on prosecuting crimes and defending the state.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:27:45.600 - 2:41:46 PM; The speaker continued the discussion on the Department of Justice, focusing on the removal of grants from their budget to realign the department's focus on core functions like prosecuting crimes and defending the state.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:27:45.600 - 2:41:46 PM; The speaker concludes their previous statement at 02:27:45.600, but no specific new information or stance is provided in this snippet.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative MS Information Only02:28:32.240 - 2:42:33 PM; Represents concern about the allocation of various grants like Victims of Crime Act, Internet Crimes Against Children, and Child Advocacy Center Grants. They express discomfort with cutting these grants without input from the Attorney General, emphasizing the importance of organizations like CASA.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:29:49.200 - 2:43:50 PM; Discusses the governor's interest in adding more funds and suggests consulting with the Attorney General for potential budget adjustments. They highlight the significant budget increases planned for future years and the impact of federal funding cuts on the Victims of Crime Act.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative W Oppose02:31:16.479 - 2:45:17 PM; Expresses concern over the high salaries of CEOs in some of the organizations receiving grants, suggesting that these funds might be misallocated and questioning the efficiency of such spending.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Bevil Support02:32:24.720 - 2:46:25 PM; Supports the sentiment of not cutting the grants without more input from the Attorney General, citing the importance of the Victims of Crime Act funding and the role of child advocacy centers in dealing with child abuse.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:33:35.760 - 2:47:36 PM; Discusses the impact of federal funding withdrawal and the state's response to it. They also mention the consideration of budget cuts and the need for further discussion with the Attorney General.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Oppose02:34:48.640 - 2:48:49 PM; Expresses concerns about cutting funds that benefit children, citing the importance of programs like the Internet Crimes Against Children Act in combating child predators. They argue for maintaining these funds due to the potential risks to children.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:36:10.600 - 2:50:11 PM; Proposes a back-of-the-budget cut option for the Attorney General to decide on funding priorities. They also discuss the need to review full numbers by Monday to prepare for this.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:37:22.880 - 2:51:23 PM; Mentions a human trafficking grant that has not led to any arrests, suggesting a review of its effectiveness. They also discuss the transfer of funds related to the Granite Advantage Program and alcohol abuse treatment from the liquor fund to the general fund.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative MS Oppose02:38:36.000 - 2:52:37 PM; Expresses concern over the security of funding for the Granite Advantage Program if it is moved from the liquor fund to the general fund. They question the assurance of continued funding and the potential impact on 65,000 enrollees.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:39:53.280 - 2:53:54 PM; Explains that the decision on funding for the Granite Advantage Program and alcohol abuse treatment will be at the discretion of Division Three. They discuss the implications of moving funds off-budget and the statutory requirements for funding allocations.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:40:55.600 - 2:54:56 PM; Further discusses the statutory requirements and the potential risks to the Granite Advantage Program if funding sources are changed. They express skepticism about the impact of the change on the program's beneficiaries.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Oppose02:42:08.560 - 2:56:09 PM; Opposes the amendment to move funding for the Granite Advantage Program from the liquor fund to the general fund, citing the potential risk to the program's beneficiaries and the careful crafting of the original statute.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Sweeney Support02:43:34.040 - 2:57:35 PM; Moves to approve the change to House Bill 1 regarding the accounting unit.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Campbell Support02:43:34.040 - 2:57:35 PM; Seconds the motion to approve the change to House Bill 1 regarding the accounting unit.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:43:34.040 - 2:57:35 PM; Notes the variability in funding for drug and alcohol abuse based on the profits of the liquor commission. They discuss the necessity of a significant budget cut and the need to review the figures.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:54:55.920 - 3:08:56 PM; Discusses the raw figures from corrections, noting a decrease in the number of employees and inmates over the past decade.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:57:40.000 - 3:11:41 PM; The speaker discussed the details of employee numbers within the corrections department, noting that growth in employees was not in the corrections officer area but in ancillary areas. They mentioned that despite a 35% decrease in inmates, the number of employees should be reduced to match the levels when there were 2700 inmates. The proposed cut aims to bring the total number of employees back to that level, which would result in a roughly 10% cut in the department's budget.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:58:27.200 - 3:12:28 PM; The speaker continued discussing the proposed cuts, explaining that the same number of employees previously managed more inmates, justifying the current layoffs. They detailed that the cuts would affect 150 positions, resulting in actual layoffs, and mentioned going through the positions to make specific choices for these cuts.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only02:59:18.479 - 3:13:19 PM; The speaker addressed the issue of overtime within the corrections department, noting that the department often budgets little to no overtime, yet they work a significant amount of overtime. They proposed converting half of the funded but unfilled corrections officer positions into an overtime budget, suggesting this would better align the budget with actual needs. They mentioned specific numbers for different accounting units.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only03:00:42.560 - 3:14:43 PM; The speaker responded to concerns about the impact of the proposed cuts on the corrections department, clarifying that all 150 positions listed would result in layoffs, not just reductions in unfilled positions. They mentioned a separate amendment for HB1 and the need to address unfilled positions throughout the state budget, suggesting that some positions should be removed while others could be used for overtime.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only03:02:00.240 - 3:16:01 PM; The speaker further discussed the rationale behind the proposed cuts, emphasizing the need to reduce positions due to historical staffing levels and current budget constraints. They pointed out the high cost of certain positions and questioned the necessity of these roles, suggesting a need for efficiency and budget alignment.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only03:03:30.680 - 3:17:31 PM; The speaker addressed concerns about the impact of layoffs on the corrections department, particularly in light of past staffing issues and the use of the National Guard. They justified the cuts as necessary for budget management, emphasizing that the cuts were targeted at areas perceived to be overstaffed, and not affecting non-personnel items.
HB2 2024-211h: Unnamed Speaker Information Only03:04:56.840 - 3:18:57 PM; The speaker clarified that the proposed cuts do not affect non-personnel items and rejected the suggestion of a blanket budget cut, emphasizing the deliberate nature of the cuts to target overstaffed areas.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative W Support03:05:42.640 - 3:19:43 PM; Representative W expressed support for the budget amendment, citing previous discussions and meetings regarding the budget issues. He believes that if the department managed with fewer people incarcerated 10 years ago, they should be able to do so now.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Muns Information Only03:06:56.560 - 3:20:57 PM; Representative Muns inquired if the proposal had been reviewed with the Department of Corrections, to which the response was negative, and no plans to do so before voting were indicated.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Bable Information Only03:06:56.560 - 3:20:57 PM; Representative Bable mentioned the presence of someone from the Department of Corrections and suggested they should provide input, especially since some staffing increases might have been in response to challenges at the prison.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Run Oppose03:08:03.600 - 3:22:04 PM; Representative Run criticized the proposal for cutting positions without consulting the Department of Corrections. He mentioned a lawsuit that necessitated the creation of a women's prison and related program positions, suggesting some cuts might be legally required programs.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Eel Oppose03:08:03.600 - 3:22:04 PM; Representative Eel found it irresponsible to make cuts without discussing them with Commissioner Hanks, pointing out potential understaffing issues 10 years ago and the possibility of outsourcing some positions.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative McGuire Information Only03:09:29.840 - 3:23:30 PM; Representative McGuire sought clarification on the amendment's effect, confirming that abolishing positions would move funds to overtime within the same accounting unit.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Oppose03:10:34.560 - 3:24:35 PM; Representative R highlighted the issue of forced overtime and its impact on corrections officers' personal lives. He criticized the lack of consultation with Commissioner Hanks and the potential disrespect shown by not involving her in the discussion.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative M Oppose03:12:03.880 - 3:26:04 PM; Representative M emphasized the significance of the cuts and the need to hear from Commissioner Hanks to understand the impact. He suggested scheduling a meeting with her the following week to make an informed decision.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative Griffin Support03:13:23.000 - 3:27:24 PM; Representative Griffin acknowledged the difficulty of the vote but stressed the necessity of balancing the budget. He hoped that the Senate might restore some funding.
HB2 2024-211h: Representative R Information Only03:14:44.800 - 3:28:45 PM; Representative R inquired about potential revenue from a previously postponed bill, suggesting that a tax on vaping and e-cigarettes could help meet budget goals and possibly reduce usage among young people.