Committee Summary for Senate Commerce (04/15/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB296 00:02:43.200 - 8:32:54 AM	Public Hearing	relative to issuing building permits along private roads.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB685 00:24:06.720 - 8:54:17 AM	Public Hearing	permitting in all residentially zoned areas by right the construction of manufactured housing.	Alexander, Joe(R)[A]2024
HB382 00:57:57.359 - 9:28:08 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to authority for municipalities to regulate mandatory on-site parking requirements.	Sweeney, Joe(R)[A-]2024
HB382 2025-1243S 01:12:45.600 - 9:42:56 AM	Public Hearing	(New Title) relative to authority for municipalities to regulate mandatory on-site parking requirements.	Sweeney, Joe(R)[A-]2024
HB437 01:21:41.239 - 9:51:52 AM	Public Hearing	providing specific curative measures for undischarged mortgages.	Boyd, Bill(R)[B]2024
HB413 01:30:54.679 - 10:01:05 AM	Public Hearing	relative to subdivision regulations on the completion of improvements and the regulation of building permits.	Pauer, Diane(R)[A]2024

HB296: Representative Dumont Support00:02:43.200 - 8:32:54 AM; Representative Dumont presented House Bill 296 on behalf of Representative Lad, who was not present. He emphasized that the bill allows property owners to build on land along private or class 6 roads, enhancing their property rights. He mentioned that this is similar to SB281, which was recommended for passage with an amendment by the committee and eventually passed. He encouraged the committee to focus on the first two paragraphs of the provided testimony and offered to answer any questions.
HB296: Don Marryman, Raymond Oppose00:03:52.080 - 8:34:03 AM; Don Marryman from Raymond expressed opposition to HB296. He highlighted the potential financial burden on towns when building on class 6 roads, using examples from his town and Nottingham. He stressed that such developments could lead to significant infrastructure costs for taxpayers, suggesting that local boards should retain control over these decisions due to their understanding of local conditions.
HB296: Patricia Bridgio, Raymond Oppose00:09:52.320 - 8:40:03 AM; Patricia Bridgio, also from Raymond and chair of the board of selectmen, opposed HB296. She criticized the bundling of bills with redundant information to ensure passage and raised concerns about the financial impact on towns from building on class 6 and private roads. She questioned the state's role in supporting towns financially if such bills pass and emphasized the need for local control over these decisions, citing data that suggests New Hampshire's housing needs are met.
HB296: Brody Dea, New Hampshire Municipal Association Information Only00:16:52.399 - 8:47:03 AM; Brody Dea from the New Hampshire Municipal Association was present to provide information, though the transcript cuts off before his testimony could be detailed.
HB296: Brody Dea, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose00:17:19.760 - 8:47:30 AM; Brody Dea from the New Hampshire Municipal Association spoke against House Bill 296. He initially supported the bill because it allowed governing bodies to approve construction on private roads without planning board review, adding flexibility. However, he noted a typo in the amended bill on line four where 'identify' should be 'identified'. He expressed concerns that the bill would preempt existing law by mandating building permits for roads built to town standards, potentially forcing towns to issue permits without notice of non-maintenance or liability. He highlighted the risks of building on class 6 roads, which are not designed for development and could lead to safety issues for emergency services due to inadequate infrastructure. He also clarified that the bill's language on subdivisions is confusing as it implies planning boards issue building permits, which is not the case in New Hampshire. He concluded by opposing the bill due to these issues and suggested significant changes.
HB685: Representative Joe Alexander, Town of Gostown Support00:24:06.720 - 8:54:17 AM; Representative Joe Alexander from Gostown introduced House Bill 685, which aims to update the definition of manufactured housing to distinguish it from mobile homes and modular buildings. The bill proposes that manufactured housing be allowed in any residential zone by right, citing its affordability and energy efficiency. He mentioned a successful manufactured housing park in Gostown as an example and suggested that manufactured homes could start at $140,000 to $150,000, serving as an affordable housing option for the elderly and first-time homebuyers.
HB685: Patricia Bridges, Raymond Oppose00:28:26.640 - 8:58:37 AM; Patricia Bridges from Raymond opposed House Bill 685, arguing that it would not lower housing prices as claimed. She cited current manufactured home prices starting at $240,000 with high HOA fees, suggesting developers would not lower prices. She criticized the bill for not addressing density and sewage issues and for imposing a one-size-fits-all approach that could burden towns with zoning adjustments. She emphasized the need for more thorough review of the bills' impacts on individual towns.
HB685: Don Marman, Raymond Oppose00:33:01.120 - 9:03:12 AM; Don Marman from Raymond opposed House Bill 685, expressing concerns about the sudden introduction of the bills and their potential to increase population density without considering local sewage and water issues. He highlighted the importance of local control over zoning to mitigate costs and environmental impacts, referencing the varied nature of New Hampshire's municipalities. He used a quote from Henry Hazlitt to argue for considering the broader and long-term effects of policy decisions.
HB685: Abby Bronson, New Hampshire Community Loan Fund Support00:37:29.200 - 9:07:40 AM; Abby Bronson from the New Hampshire Community Loan Fund supported House Bill 685, emphasizing that it would treat manufactured housing the same as stick-built homes, allowing them in residentially zoned areas. She addressed concerns about density and home prices, noting that manufactured homes are built to a high standard and can offer affordable housing options. She shared personal examples of manufactured homes that could meet her needs and those of others looking for starter homes or downsizing options, advocating for the bill to increase homeownership opportunities.
HB685: Joanie McIntyre, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Support00:43:37.440 - 9:13:48 AM; Joanie McIntyre from the New Hampshire Association of Realtors supported House Bill 685, highlighting that manufactured homes are a significant portion of affordable housing in New Hampshire. She noted the increase in manufactured home prices but emphasized their affordability compared to traditional homes. McIntyre argued that zoning should not limit housing types based on preference and that manufactured homes are a viable option for first-time buyers and seniors, supporting workforce and economic growth in the state.
HB685: Lily Wellington, State's Commission on Aging Support00:46:55.680 - 9:17:06 AM; Lily Wellington, the new executive director for the State's Commission on Aging, supports HB685. She emphasized the need for a variety of housing options to support the aging population in New Hampshire, highlighting that manufactured housing is a low-maintenance and low-barrier option. She noted the significant percentage of the elderly with disabilities and stressed the need for creative housing solutions to accommodate the demographic shift expected by 2030.
HB685: Ivy Van, Peterborough Support00:48:58.839 - 9:19:09 AM; Ivy Van, a land use planner from Peterborough, supports HB685. She pointed out the mismatch between the current housing stock and demographic needs, with many households being one or two people. She argued that manufactured housing units are well-built, attractive, and economical, and can help address the housing shortage, stabilize prices, and fit into any residential area without devaluing property.
HB685: Margaret Burns, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose00:51:08.480 - 9:21:19 AM; Margaret Burns from the New Hampshire Municipal Association opposes HB685 due to its expansive nature and potential conflicts with existing laws. She explained that the bill does not simply allow manufactured housing where stick-built homes are permitted but creates conflicts with the amended statute 674:32. She also noted the bill's lack of distinction between manufactured homes on individual lots versus in parks and highlighted the vagueness of the language that could lead to legal challenges.
HB685: Karen Susie, Sheen Infinity Capital Group, New Hampshire Manufactured Housing Association Support00:55:46.640 - 9:25:57 AM; Karen Susie, representing the New Hampshire Manufactured Housing Association, supports HB685. She mentioned a practical issue where the town of Winchester automatically denies permits for manufactured homes, forcing homeowners to seek variances. She believes the bill is straightforward and aims to address such real-world challenges.
HB382: Senator McHugh, District 11, Marramac, Milford, Emerson, and Wilton Information Only00:57:57.359 - 9:28:08 AM; Senator McHugh introduced HB382, which pertains to the authority for municipalities to regulate mandatory on-site parking requirements. He mentioned that other individuals were present to testify on behalf of the bill.
HB382: Miss Brio Oppose00:59:12.799 - 9:29:23 AM; Miss Brio opposed HB382, arguing that limiting parking spaces to one per unit restricts the mobility and social interaction of residents. She highlighted the necessity of having at least two parking spaces per household to accommodate work commutes and family visits, especially in rural areas where public transportation like Uber is not available.
HB382: Margaret Burns, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose01:01:17.520 - 9:31:28 AM; Margaret Burns from the New Hampshire Municipal Association spoke in opposition to House Bill 382. She argued that the bill conflicts with Senate Bill 284, already passed, and would reduce the number of parking spots permitted per unit, thus limiting local decision-making on parking regulations. This could lead to safety issues, increased law enforcement presence due to parking disputes, and municipalities being involved in resolving parking issues. Burns highlighted that current regulations requiring an average of 1.5 parking spaces per unit are reasonable and have only been in effect since January of the current year, suggesting insufficient time to assess their impact. She concluded by stating that the current law is sufficient for regulating parking at the local level and requested the committee to find HB382 inexpedient to legislate.
HB382: Representative Steven Bogurt, Laconia Oppose01:04:42.640 - 9:34:53 AM; Representative Steven Bogurt from Laconia, who is also a city councilor and has been a zoning chairperson for over 25 years, opposed House Bill 382. He explained the challenges in rural cities where residents need to drive to stores due to the lack of walkable communities. He emphasized the current law's provision of 1.5 parking spaces per unit as necessary, citing examples where inadequate parking led to neighborhood disputes and the need for street modifications. Bogurt argued that reducing parking requirements would exacerbate these problems, especially with the conversion of single-family homes into multi-unit apartments, and urged maintaining the current standard.
HB382: Unnamed Speaker, Unspecified Town Oppose01:10:09.920 - 9:40:20 AM; An unnamed speaker from an unspecified town opposed House Bill 382, highlighting local housing issues exacerbated by vacation rentals and second homes. They noted that reducing parking requirements could force residents to park on public streets, posing safety risks, especially on state roads without shoulders. The speaker urged a no vote on the bill, advocating for local authorities to retain control over parking decisions to mitigate such risks.
HB382 2025-1243S: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:12:45.600 - 9:42:56 AM; The speaker introduced the amendment 2025-1243S to House Bill 382, explaining that it aims to remove the requirement for vehicle funding loan contracts to have equal periodic payments. The rationale provided was that modern financial practices have evolved, allowing for different payment structures over the life of a loan. The speaker mentioned that several individuals were present to discuss this amendment further.
HB382 2025-1243S: Dan Bennett, New Hampshire Auto Dealers Association Support01:13:54.719 - 9:44:05 AM; Dan Bennett, representing the New Hampshire Auto Dealers Association, supports the amendment to HB382. He explained that a flex payment plan, which the amendment would allow, is an innovative tool for dealers. While it won't drastically increase sales, it provides a competitive advantage, as dealers in neighboring Massachusetts can offer this to their customers. The inability to offer this in New Hampshire puts local dealers at a disadvantage.
HB382 2025-1243S: Michelle Elder, Ford Motor Company Support01:15:16.080 - 9:45:27 AM; Michelle Elder, Regional Director for State Government Affairs at Ford Motor Company, supports the amendment to HB382. She explained that current New Hampshire law restricts dealers and customers from utilizing flexible payment options like Ford Credit's Flex Buy program. This amendment would allow New Hampshire consumers to access innovative financing programs, aligning the state with 43 others where such programs are available.
HB382 2025-1243S: Vince Tally, Ford Credit Support01:16:17.840 - 9:46:28 AM; Vince Tally, Regional Manager for Motor Credit at Ford, supports the amendment to HB382. He detailed how Ford Credit's Flex Buy program offers lower payments for the first 36 months, helping consumers manage their budgets better. He emphasized that this amendment would level the playing field for New Hampshire customers and does not compromise consumer protections, as evidenced by performance data from other states.
HB382 2025-1243S: Tom Buchard, Ford Motor Company, resident of New Hampshire Support01:19:02.080 - 9:49:13 AM; Tom Buchard, a long-time Ford employee and New Hampshire resident, supports the amendment to HB382. He highlighted that the Flex Buy program would provide another option for customers to purchase vehicles, making payments more affordable, especially in the initial years of the contract. He believes this will not drastically change sales volume but offers a valuable alternative for consumers.
HB437: Bill Boyd, Representative from Hillsboro District 12, Marlow Support01:21:41.239 - 9:51:52 AM; Bill Boyd, the prime sponsor of HB437, explained that the bill provides curative measures for undischarged mortgages. He highlighted his profession as a title examiner and the current lack of legal clarity on handling such mortgages. The bill mimics a Massachusetts statute and has significant stakeholder support, including from the banking and real estate sectors. He noted the bill's unanimous passage through the House Commerce Committee and its support in the House.
HB437: Joanie McIntyre, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Support01:23:30.639 - 9:53:41 AM; Joanie McIntyre from the New Hampshire Association of Realtors supported HB437, describing the stress and uncertainty caused by undischarged mortgages during home purchases. She explained the situation's impact on buyers and sellers, including delays and the potential collapse of deals. The bill would provide a clear process to address these issues, reducing stress and enhancing transparency in real estate transactions.
HB437: Pat McNicholas, Retired Real Estate Attorney Support01:25:53.600 - 9:56:04 AM; Pat McNicholas, a retired real estate attorney, supported HB437. He shared his experience of filing numerous superior court actions to discharge obsolete mortgages, noting that none were ever contested. He emphasized the cost and complexity of the current process, which can amount to between $5,000 and $10,000 per case. The bill would simplify and reduce the cost of resolving these issues, benefiting consumers and homeowners.
HB413: Representative Diane Power, representing the towns of Brookline, Mason, and Greenville in Hillsborough County District 36 Support01:30:54.679 - 10:01:05 AM; Representative Diane Power, the prime sponsor of House Bill 413, introduced the bill which is a refiling of 2024 House Bill 1215. She highlighted that the bill stems from a year-long inquiry by the House Special Committee on Housing aimed at addressing the housing crisis in New Hampshire. The bill passed the House last year but failed due to non-germane amendments in the Senate. HB413 aims to provide greater flexibility and lower risk for developers, allowing them to undertake larger projects that might take several years to complete. Key points of the bill include extending the exemption period for subdivision plats from 5 to 7 years, increasing the preliminary step period from 2 to 3 years, and streamlining the building and fire code appeals process. The bill also corrects an oversight in RSA 6733 regarding the eligibility of zoning boards to act as building code boards of appeal.
HB413: Don Marman Oppose01:38:07.360 - 10:08:18 AM; Don Marman expressed concerns about the bill, questioning the urgency of the housing crisis and the proposed extension of time for project completion. He argued that extending the time frame could lead to developers waiting out unfavorable planning board cycles, potentially leading to legal challenges that smaller towns might not be able to afford. He criticized the ambiguous language in housing bills, suggesting that it could lead to lawsuits and increased costs for taxpayers due to the burden of legal work under the 91A laws. Marman urged the committee not to approve HB413 or similar housing zoning bills, advocating for local control over such matters.
HB413: Margaret Burns, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose01:41:15.760 - 10:11:26 AM; Margaret Burns from the New Hampshire Municipal Association expressed a 'light oppose' to HB413. She supported the extension of time periods in the statute but objected to the retroactive application of the 7-year and 3-year periods, suggesting it should be forward-looking as per previous amendments like Senate Bill 144 in 2011. Additionally, she opposed the limitation on the jurisdiction of local building code boards of appeals to only local amendments, arguing it could reduce efficiency. Burns also noted that if House Bill 428 were to pass, which would prevent municipalities from adopting local building code amendments, the contentious provisions in HB413 would become irrelevant.

Innis, Daniel(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Ricciardi, Denise(V Chairman)(R)[C-]2024	Murphy, Keith(R)[B+]2024
Fenton, Donovan(D)[F]2024	McGough, Tim(R)	Reardon, Tara(D)