Committee Summary for House Finance Division I (05/13/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB74 00:01:17.759 - 9:00:03 AM	Public Hearing	defining the term citizen for the purposes of the right to know law and including preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum of a majority of a public body as disclosable documents.	Edwards, Jess(R)[B+]2024
SB63 00:52:53.119 - 9:51:39 AM	Public Hearing	relative to funding for the division of travel and tourism.	Lang, Timothy(R)[C+]2024
SB241 01:05:26.319 - 10:04:12 AM	Public Hearing	relative to construction of a public pier on Hampton Beach and making an appropriation therefor.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024
SB241 01:47:12.000 - 10:45:58 AM	Executive Session	relative to construction of a public pier on Hampton Beach and making an appropriation therefor.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024

HB74: Representative Carol Maguire, Marramac 27, representing the towns of Allenstown, Dunbarton, Epsom, and Hooksett Support00:01:17.759 - 9:00:03 AM; Representative Maguire introduced House Bill 74, which passed the House. The bill requires agencies that issue permits involving real property to track and report the number of permits issued and the time taken. She mentioned that the bill was initially handled by the Senate EDNA committee before moving to the Resources, Recreation, and Development committee. The bill aims to address issues such as long waiting times for driveway permits, which she personally experienced when building her house. She emphasized the need for data to ensure the fees charged by agencies are appropriate and to evaluate the statutory requirements for permit issuance.
HB74: Adam Crapo, Assistant Commissioner at the Department of Environmental Services (DES) Information Only00:09:43.839 - 9:08:29 AM; Adam Crapo stated that DES is neutral on HB74. He explained that DES has multiple databases that track different types of permits, and a manual process is often used to compile data. Recent capital budget appropriations have allowed for online upgrades for land resources management permits, but expanding this to other permit types would require additional resources. He suggested that two part-time positions could help compile the required data for the report, as the current systems do not automatically track all the necessary information. He also questioned whether the report should cover all permit types or focus on specific ones.
HB74: Susan Clawson, Director of Operations at the Department of Transportation (DOT) Information Only00:33:25.120 - 9:32:11 AM; Susan Clawson stated that DOT is neutral on the legislation. She mentioned that DOT implemented Salesforce in August, which provides good data moving forward. However, the data required for the report is currently stored in the backend of the system and in text fields, necessitating software improvements to generate the required reports. She highlighted that there are currently 109 open applications over 90 days and explained that the report could be large depending on the specifics. She also noted that the delays are often due to interactions with applicants. The fiscal note included software development costs to meet the reporting requirements.
HB74: Committee Discussion Information Only00:41:13.280 - 9:39:59 AM; The committee discussed the implications of HB74. Representative Maguire suggested passing the bill with a delay to allow agencies time to prepare for reporting. Representative Muns expressed concerns about underfunding agencies and suggested not passing the bill but including it in the next budget. Representative Wiler proposed requesting a report from the agencies to understand their capabilities and the significance of the problem. Representative Evil supported the idea of retaining the bill to allow for amendments and further discussion. The committee decided to retain the bill and work on amendments for a week before revisiting it.
SB63: Representative Ali Information Only00:52:53.119 - 9:51:39 AM; Representative Ali briefly mentioned that Senate Bill 63 deals with changes to the formula for calculating the travel and tourism budget, which were made without the knowledge of the Ways and Means Committee. He noted that it took several weeks to understand the changes and emphasized the need for better cooperation between revenue and budget committees. The bill aims to adjust the formula based on the meals and rooms tax revenue.
SB63: Unknown Speaker 1 Information Only00:53:50.400 - 9:52:36 AM; The speaker discussed the allocation of funds from the general fund for travel and tourism, based on previous revenue from rooms and meals. They noted that this method can result in a lag in funding if there was a decrease in tourism the previous year, such as during a poor ski season due to melting snow.
SB63: Unknown Speaker 2 Support00:54:40.760 - 9:53:26 AM; The speaker praised the strategic use of funds by the travel and tourism sector, citing examples of how they adjust marketing strategies based on domestic and international tourism conditions. They mentioned targeting advertising towards Europe when the U.S. market is unstable and promoting New Hampshire's snow conditions to neighboring states during ski season.
SB63: Unknown Speaker 3 Support00:55:30.960 - 9:54:16 AM; The speaker provided examples of effective marketing strategies used by the travel and tourism sector, such as informing Massachusetts and Connecticut about New Hampshire's snow conditions during ski season. They also discussed the return on investment, mentioning that the revenue from rooms and meals was eight times the amount spent on travel and tourism, though they heard a figure of twenty times as well.
SB63: Unknown Speaker 4 Support00:56:21.599 - 9:55:07 AM; The speaker explained the impact of a legislative change that resulted in a 30% loss to travel and tourism funding due to the creation of a municipal fund. They supported the bill as it aims to restore this funding, allowing the travel and tourism sector to generate more revenue for the state.
SB63: Unknown Speaker 4 Information Only00:56:21.599 - 9:55:07 AM; The speaker expressed concerns about the automatic spending section of the budget, particularly how it applies to money sent to municipalities and its effect on travel and tourism. They argued that the automatic spending mechanism seems counterintuitive, as it increases spending when rooms and meals tax revenue is high and decreases it when revenue is low, contrary to what one might expect if the spending were believed to generate more tax revenue. The speaker mentioned that this section is often ignored in the budget, and this year, it was followed, which led to the introduction of the bill.
SB63: Representative Sweeney Information Only00:59:19.440 - 9:58:05 AM; Representative Sweeney moved to retain Senate Bill 63, indicating that the budget had already been passed and suggesting that retaining the bill would be appropriate under the circumstances.
SB63: Representative Hacken Phillips Information Only01:00:24.000 - 9:59:10 AM; Representative Hacken Phillips inquired about the broader implications of the bill, noting that it could affect not just the general fund and travel and tourism budget but also municipal revenue and the education trust fund, highlighting the complexity of the financial impacts.
SB63: Representative Wiler Oppose01:01:39.280 - 10:00:25 AM; Representative Wiler opposed the bill on two grounds: it reverses the decision to stop spending on tourism advertising, which he believed was necessary to measure the effectiveness of such spending, and it affects meals and rooms tax, which has been criticized for diverting funds. He also expressed concerns about potential negative impacts on tourism due to external political issues.
SB63: Representative Griffin Information Only01:02:43.440 - 10:01:29 AM; Representative Griffin supported retaining the bill due to the ongoing uncertainties with the budget, suggesting that keeping the bill alive would be prudent until the budget situation was clearer.
SB241: Representative Muns Information Only01:05:26.319 - 10:04:12 AM; Representative Muns introduced Senate Bill 241, which originally sought funding for the design and engineering of a pier at Hampton Beach State Park. The Senate amended the bill to remove the funding request and instead establish a fund for future contributions towards the pier. Muns mentioned his personal opposition to the pier project since 2022, citing lack of local support and environmental concerns. He proposed an amendment to allow the fund to support other accessibility projects at the beach, referencing a 2024 accessibility study.
SB241: Colin Capel, Chief of Staff for Parks and Recreation under DNCR Information Only01:11:04.719 - 10:09:50 AM; Colin Capel stated that the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources remained neutral on the pier project but supported the amendment. He highlighted ongoing efforts to improve accessibility at Hampton Beach, such as extending Moby Mats and improving wayfinding kiosks, suggesting that the amendment would provide more flexibility in using available funds for accessibility improvements.
SB241: Representative Evil Information Only01:16:31.760 - 10:15:17 AM; Representative Evil questioned the purpose of the pier, whether it was primarily for tourism or specifically for accessibility. He also raised concerns about the maintenance and the potential environmental impact of the pier, referencing the lack of local support and the complexity of the project.
SB241: Representative Muns Information Only01:17:42.960 - 10:16:28 AM; Representative Muns reiterated his opposition to the pier, citing the lack of local support and the environmental and logistical challenges associated with potential pier locations. He emphasized the financial burden on local taxpayers for maintenance and policing and questioned the necessity of the pier given existing fishing access.
SB241: Representative WY Oppose01:22:11.360 - 10:20:57 AM; Representative WY opposed the pier project, citing overcrowding and parking issues at Hampton Beach. He suggested alternative ways to provide access to water for the handicapped, such as using wave chairs or boats, and expressed concerns about the pier's vulnerability to winter storms.
SB241: Representative R Oppose01:29:42.080 - 10:28:28 AM; Representative R opposed setting up a fund for the pier, arguing that there was no need for such legislation to improve accessibility since donations could already be accepted for this purpose. He expressed concerns about the cost and maintenance of the pier and suggested that the project was premature without broader support.
SB241: Representative Sweeney Information Only01:30:54.080 - 10:29:40 AM; Representative Sweeney supported amending the bill to allow for the pier fund to be used for accessibility improvements, arguing that the state should not fund the pier directly but enable private organizations to do so if they chose to. He believed the amendment would empower private initiatives without putting the burden on taxpayers.
SB241: Representative Campbell Oppose01:35:07.199 - 10:33:53 AM; Representative Campbell was against the pier but supported the amendment to set up a fund with minimal state involvement. He emphasized that the amendment should ensure taxpayer funds are not used for the pier's construction.
SB241: Representative Hackenfeld Information Only01:39:57.360 - 10:38:43 AM; Representative Hackenfeld highlighted the legislative history of the pier project, including studies on feasibility and accessibility. He suggested that the committee should consider the full context of the project when deciding on amendments, acknowledging the complexity and the long road leading to the current bill.
SB241: Representative Sweeney Vote01:47:12.000 - 10:45:58 AM; Representative Sweeney moved to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate, citing too many problems with the bill.
SB241: Representative R Vote01:47:12.000 - 10:45:58 AM; Representative R seconded the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Vice Chairman Campbell Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Griffin Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Sweeney Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Wiler Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Eel Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Muns Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Representative Hacken Phillips Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Clerk Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.
SB241: Chairman Magcguire Vote01:48:04.639 - 10:46:50 AM; Voted yes on the motion to find Senate Bill 241 inexpedient to legislate.