Committee Summary for Senate Commerce (05/13/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB60 00:07:49.440 - 8:35:20 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the termination of tenancy at the expiration of the tenancy or lease term.	Lynn, Bob(R)[A]2024
HB633 2024s 01:16:04.960 - 9:43:35 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) creating a legislative study committee to investigate the implementation of housing investment trusts in New Hampshire.	Daniels, Gary(R)
HB649 2029 01:41:11.520 - 10:08:42 AM	Executive Session	removing the requirement for physical safety inspections and on-board diagnostic tests for passenger vehicles and eliminating funding for the motor vehicle air pollution abatement fund.	Granger, Michael(R)[A+]2024
HB60 1954s 01:47:39.600 - 10:15:10 AM	Executive Session	relative to the termination of tenancy at the expiration of the tenancy or lease term.	Lynn, Bob(R)[A]2024
HB280 01:57:42.480 - 10:25:13 AM	Executive Session	relative to wage payments.	Turcotte, Len(R)[A]2024
HB296 1899s 01:58:52.560 - 10:26:23 AM	Executive Session	relative to issuing building permits along private roads.	Ladd, Rick(R)[B+]2024
HB342 1981s 02:02:48.080 - 10:30:19 AM	Executive Session	relative to the approval process for new construction.	Long, Patrick(D)
HB342 2132s 02:03:56.480 - 10:31:27 AM	Executive Session	relative to the approval process for new construction.	Long, Patrick(D)
HB457 2082s 02:07:09.760 - 10:34:40 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) relative to the occupancy of housing units.	Pauer, Diane(R)[A]2024
HB467 02:08:26.079 - 10:35:57 AM	Executive Session	defining "social districts" and enabling municipalities to create social districts.	Boyd, Bill(R)[B]2024
HB577 2050s 02:09:36.000 - 10:37:07 AM	Executive Session	relative to modifying the definition of ADUs.	Alexander, Joe(R)[A]2024

HB60: Representative Reed Oppose00:07:49.440 - 8:35:20 AM; Representative Reed strongly opposes House Bill 60, arguing that it is detrimental during New Hampshire's severe housing crisis. They highlight the current 0.6% vacancy rate, making it extremely difficult for tenants to find housing. Reed points out that the bill would allow landlords to evict good tenants who have consistently paid rent and followed lease terms, which could lead to homelessness and loss of workforce as people are forced to leave the state. They criticize the sponsor's argument about a 'revolving door' of tenants, stating it is inaccurate because evictions create a record that further hinders tenants' ability to find new housing. Reed also mentions that existing laws already cover reasons for eviction, making the bill unnecessary. They propose an amendment that would limit the bill's application to leases of 12 months or more and only when the vacancy rate exceeds 5%. Reed also raises concerns about the bill being used for discriminatory evictions based on personal or political reasons.
HB60: Representative Kathy Stab, Hillsboro District 25, Ward Five in Manchester Oppose00:13:28.240 - 8:40:59 AM; Representative Kathy Stab opposes HB60, emphasizing the impact on low-income renters in her district, particularly in Manchester. She references the National Low-Income Housing Coalition's 2025 GAP report, which details the shortage of affordable housing for low-income renters. Stab points out that while there are enough affordable apartments for higher income renters, the situation worsens for those at or below 50% of the area median income, with even fewer options for extremely low-income households. She expresses concern that the bill would destabilize the housing market further, leading to increased homelessness among the most vulnerable populations, including the elderly and disabled. Stab urges the committee to recommend the bill as Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL).
HB60: Jonathan Hill, New Hampshire Rental Properties Association, landlord Support00:17:12.000 - 8:44:43 AM; Jonathan Hill supports HB60, arguing that a lease is a contract with a clear beginning and end, and both parties should expect stability during the lease term. He contends that the bill is not meant to evict good tenants but to provide landlords with flexibility at the end of a lease. Hill explains that the bill requires landlords to give tenants 60 days' notice, which is more than the current notice periods for evictions, giving tenants ample time to find new housing. He also mentions that the process of eviction is costly and risky for landlords, which could lead to higher rents overall. Hill refutes claims that the bill would lead to evictions on tenants' records, stating that tenants can move out before the eviction process begins.
HB60: Elliot Barry, former attorney at New Hampshire Legal Assistance Oppose00:21:37.280 - 8:49:08 AM; Elliot Barry opposes HB60, asserting that it introduces a new ground for eviction that is unnecessary given the existing laws that already cover various legitimate reasons for eviction. He mentions that the eviction rate in New Hampshire is higher than in other New England states without good cause eviction laws, supporting his argument that the bill is not needed. Barry warns that the bill could enable unlawful discrimination and retaliation against tenants, as it provides landlords with an independent reason for eviction that tenants would struggle to challenge in court. He also raises concerns about the lengthy processes for addressing discrimination claims, which may not help tenants facing immediate homelessness.
HB60: Kate Marquee, Manchester Oppose00:26:50.799 - 8:54:21 AM; Kate Marquee, a resident of Manchester and a renter for nearly 25 years, expressed her opposition to HB60. She shared a personal anecdote about her landlord, highlighting the ease of their relationship before the bill's introduction. She now fears interactions could lead to non-renewal of her lease due to HB60, which she believes creates an unsettling power imbalance favoring landlords. Marquee also discussed the difficulty of finding new apartments in the current housing crisis, noting that a 60-day notice period is insufficient. She argued that the bill, intended to fix a loophole, creates more problems for renters than it solves and urged the committee to consider the stress it adds to good renters.
HB60: Todd Marsh, President of the New Hampshire Local Welfare Administrators Association Oppose00:30:59.880 - 8:58:30 AM; Todd Marsh, representing the New Hampshire Local Welfare Administrators Association, opposed HB60, stating that the current law's language serves as a counterbalance to the power landlords have over the basic need of housing. He used an example of a mother who might face eviction not due to traditional reasons but due to exercising her rights, emphasizing the potential for retaliatory evictions. Marsh argued that the bill, while presented as pro-housing, would lead to flexible displacement outweighing the benefits of flexible entry, ultimately costing taxpayers more. He urged the committee to oppose the bill as it would cause the least harm and save taxpayer dollars.
HB60: Jennifer Chisum, Executive Director of the New Hampshire Coalition to End Homelessness Oppose00:34:56.320 - 9:02:27 AM; Jennifer Chisum testified against HB60, highlighting the severe housing crisis in New Hampshire with a 44% increase in emergency shelter usage and a quadrupling of people staying outside or in their cars since 2019. She pointed out that median income households can only afford 13% of two-bedroom rentals, leading to severe cost burdens for many families. Chisum cited a study showing that evictions lead to increased homelessness and decreased family income and credit scores, effects that persist for years. She questioned the timing and necessity of the bill given the current housing market and urged the committee to vote against it for the stability and safety of families.
HB60: Violet Lumpy, Plymouth State University student, Plymouth Oppose00:37:55.599 - 9:05:26 AM; Violet Lumpy, a psychology student at Plymouth State University, opposed HB60, emphasizing the importance of stability for well-being. She shared her experience of moving to Plymouth and finding stability through university housing, which helped her overcome health challenges. Lumpy expressed fear about future housing stability, particularly as a disabled and queer individual, fearing that no-cause evictions could lead to discrimination. She urged the committee to vote against the bill for the sake of young New Hampshirites seeking stability and community.
HB60: Mark Hilton Sr., Manchester Oppose00:41:07.680 - 9:08:38 AM; Mark Hilton Sr., a resident of Manchester with a long family history in New Hampshire, strongly opposed HB60. He argued that the bill would break down community fabric, leading to increased homelessness and straining state and municipal resources. Hilton criticized the bill for potentially allowing landlords to evict tenants based on personal biases, which he believed went against the founding principles of the state. He emphasized the high costs and competitiveness of finding housing in Manchester, urging the committee to reject the bill to uphold the state's values of equality and community.
HB60: Lily Wellington, State's Commission on Aging Oppose00:43:31.680 - 9:11:02 AM; Lily Wellington, the executive director for the state's commission on Aging, spoke against HB60. She highlighted the aging demographic in New Hampshire, noting that 27% of the population is aged 60 or above, expected to rise to 30% by 2030. She emphasized the importance of renting as a flexible housing option for the elderly, allowing them to choose accommodations that suit their needs, such as first-floor units with accessible bathrooms. Wellington expressed concerns that HB60 could reduce housing options for the aging population and other vulnerable groups, potentially increasing the financial burden on communities and towns by forcing evicted tenants to seek help without adequate resources.
HB60: Jessica Marguson, Manchester Oppose00:46:05.119 - 9:13:36 AM; Jessica Marguson, who runs a tenant clinic in Manchester, spoke in opposition to HB60. She noted the challenges faced by many renters who cannot attend hearings to voice their concerns. Marguson pointed out that approximately 157,000 renter households in New Hampshire represent about one-third of all households, and many are disenfranchised and feel unheard. She argued that HB60 would create a hostile renting environment, diminishing the bargaining power of tenants and potentially leading to frequent moves with high associated costs, such as security deposits and first month's rent. Marguson also shared the story of a tenant facing increased rent and potential displacement due to the expiration of affordability programs.
HB60: Vanessa Blaze, New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities Oppose00:49:20.960 - 9:16:51 AM; Vanessa Blaze, director of policy and planning for the New Hampshire Council on Developmental Disabilities, opposed HB60. She referenced a Supreme Court decision over 40 years ago that aimed to protect people with disabilities from housing instability. Blaze argued that removing the protection against termination of tenancy without cause could undermine the rights of people with disabilities under the Fair Housing Act. She challenged the notion that all contracts are equal, pointing out that leases are understood to provide stability beyond their expiration. Blaze also mentioned ongoing efforts to improve housing stability for people with developmental disabilities, which she believes HB60 would counteract.
HB60: Ann Marie Oor Oppose00:53:30.319 - 9:21:01 AM; Ann Marie Oor, a 77-year-old retired nurse living on a limited income, opposed HB60. She shared her personal experience of being evicted after 18.5 years in her previous apartment due to the property being converted to Airbnb. Oor described the emotional and financial toll of her situation, including the stress leading to cardiac issues, and her struggle to find affordable housing. She expressed feeling isolated, embarrassed, and at her lowest point, nearly forced to live in her car. Oor emphasized the lack of dignity and self-worth she experienced and opposed the bill for not providing any recourse for tenants evicted without cause.
HB60: Sam Hawkins, NAMI New Hampshire Oppose00:56:51.680 - 9:24:22 AM; Sam Hawkins, representing NAMI New Hampshire, testified in opposition to House Bill 60. He highlighted the challenges faced by individuals with serious mental illness in securing stable housing and expressed concerns that the bill would facilitate discrimination against them in the rental process. Hawkins argued that the bill could increase the number of unhoused, hospitalized, or incarcerated individuals with mental illnesses. He urged the committee to find the bill inexpedient to legislate to maintain protections for renters, especially those with mental illnesses and other disabilities. He also mentioned the urgency of the issue amidst New Hampshire's housing crisis and budget constraints, though he appreciated recent actions to restore funding for community mental health programs.
HB60: Marta Hurjan, New Hampshire Legal Assistance Oppose00:58:33.200 - 9:26:04 AM; Marta Hurjan, a housing attorney with New Hampshire Legal Assistance, testified in opposition to House Bill 60. She shared her extensive experience in eviction defense and noted the ease with which landlords can already evict tenants in New Hampshire. Hurjan expressed concern that the bill would further simplify evictions, potentially leading to increased homelessness. She suggested potential amendments to the bill, such as limiting its application to 12-month leases, setting a six-month deadline for landlords to act post-lease expiration, and delaying the bill's implementation to allow time for the housing crisis to improve and for stakeholders to become familiar with the new law.
HB60: Nick Norman, Landlords Association of New Hampshire Support01:02:25.440 - 9:29:56 AM; Nick Norman, representing the Landlords Association of New Hampshire, spoke in support of House Bill 60. He argued that the bill would not increase homelessness as new tenants would replace those who move out. Norman dismissed concerns about landlords raising rents or evicting tenants without cause, stating that landlords prefer stable tenancy. He clarified that existing laws on codes, retaliation, and discrimination would remain unchanged. Norman also mentioned that the bill could encourage landlords to accept tenants with marginal applications, as they would have a mechanism to address issues without resorting to eviction.
HB60: Nick Taylor, Housing Action New Hampshire Oppose01:05:59.839 - 9:33:30 AM; Nick Taylor, director of Housing Action New Hampshire, testified in opposition to House Bill 60. He emphasized the importance of keeping people housed amidst New Hampshire's housing crisis. Taylor noted that the organization's members, including developers and landlords, have not raised this issue as a priority, instead focusing on regulatory relief and financial incentives. He pointed out that small-scale landlords (those with less than four units) are already exempt from end-of-lease laws, providing them with flexibility. Taylor urged the committee to oppose the bill, appreciating the committee's work on housing issues during the session.
HB633 2024s: Representative Daniels Support01:16:04.960 - 9:43:35 AM; Representative Daniels supported amendment 2024s to House Bill 633, which would retain the study committee while also establishing a definition of a housing investment trust. This would allow for legal work and the pursuit of a 501c3 designation. He argued that both the study and the legal definition are necessary to move forward with the initiative without delaying it for a year.
HB633 2024s: Senator Mcu Support01:18:11.679 - 9:45:42 AM; Senator Mcu expressed full support for House Bill 633, its concept, and the amendment. He emphasized the urgency of addressing housing issues and the need for both the study and the legal framework to progress simultaneously. He urged the committee to support the bill and the amendment.
HB633 2024s: Senator Rashardi Information Only01:19:14.480 - 9:46:45 AM; Senator Rashardi expressed reservations about House Bill 633, suggesting that the concept was not fully developed and involved state agencies without their input. He agreed with the idea of a study committee but clarified that it should not imply endorsement of the housing investment trust concept. He believed the trust could be created independently without government involvement.
HB633 2024s: Senator Reen Information Only01:30:02.560 - 9:57:33 AM; Senator Reen expressed concerns about the amendment's proposal for biennial inspections, citing his experience with a 10-year-old car and questioning the average age of cars in New Hampshire. He suggested that biennial inspections might not be wise and mentioned the state's average car age as 12.8 years. He also pointed out potential small changes needed in the amendment, such as correcting 'non-commercial' to 'commercial' on page two, line 20, and fixing a misspelling of 'axle' on page seven, line 22.
HB633 2024s: Senator Murphy Support01:33:14.560 - 10:00:45 AM; Senator Murphy argued against the necessity of car inspections, stating that they are ineffective and primarily benefit auto dealers. He mentioned that 39 states have eliminated such inspections without negative consequences. He supported the amendment as a compromise, believing it to be a step towards eliminating inspections entirely, and emphasized that constituents should not be treated like children in managing their vehicles.
HB633 2024s: Senator Perkins Qua Oppose01:35:17.920 - 10:02:48 AM; Senator Perkins Qua echoed some of Senator Reen's concerns but viewed the amendment as an improvement to the bill. She highlighted the importance of inspections for public safety, especially since New Hampshire does not require insurance. However, she opposed the amendment's proposal for biennial inspections, believing it goes too far, but acknowledged the amendment's efforts to simplify inspections and help those who depend on their cars for work.
HB633 2024s: Senator McHugh Support01:36:16.760 - 10:03:47 AM; Senator McHugh supported the amendment, agreeing with Senator Murphy's sentiments about public outcry over nuisance failures, particularly with onboard diagnostic sensors. He suggested removing references to the onboard diagnostic system from the amendment and correcting a typo regarding the maximum inspection period from 16 to 28 months. He viewed the amendment as a good compromise to alleviate consumer burdens while maintaining safety checks.
HB633 2024s: Senator Rashardi Support01:37:27.600 - 10:04:58 AM; Senator Rashardi introduced amendment 2110, which he described as similar to Senator Inis's amendment. He emphasized the need for compromise, proposing exemptions for low-risk vehicles while maintaining annual inspections for older, higher-risk vehicles. He believed this amendment addressed safety concerns and reduced complaints about inspections, presenting it as a good first step.
HB649 2029: Senator Murphy Support01:41:11.520 - 10:08:42 AM; Senator Murphy supported the committee amendment to amendment 2029, which included changes such as removing the onboard diagnostic system, correcting 'non-commercial' to 'commercial', and adjusting the maximum inspection period from 16 to 28 months. He believed these changes represented a good compromise and first step in addressing consumer concerns while maintaining safety.
HB649 2029: Senator Rashardi Support01:44:27.600 - 10:11:58 AM; Senator Rashardi moved to vote on his amendment, expressing readiness for a vote. The committee amendment to amendment 2029 was discussed and voted on, resulting in a tie vote of 3 to 3.
HB60 1954s: Senator Rashardi Support01:47:39.600 - 10:15:10 AM; Senator Rashardi introduced amendment 1954s, a replace all amendment to House Bill 60, which changes the minimum lease term to 12 months and adds clarifying language about eviction timing. He argued that this amendment would prevent short-term leases from becoming the norm and protect tenants from unnecessary evictions, especially given the low rental vacancy rates.
HB60 1954s: Senator Murphy Support01:50:06.400 - 10:17:37 AM; Senator Murphy supported the bill and amendment, emphasizing the importance of contracts and the right to contract. He believed the housing market is overregulated and saw the amendment as a good compromise, especially with the 5% vacancy rate trigger. He mentioned his own experience as a renter and expressed concern about unintended consequences of bad law.
HB60 1954s: Senator Fenton Oppose01:52:10.000 - 10:19:41 AM; Senator Fenton, identifying as a landlord, opposed the bill, arguing it was unnecessary and could undermine housing stability. He felt it contradicted the committee's efforts to address the housing crisis and saw it as a step backward. He supported the amendment but would vote against the bill.
HB60 1954s: Senator Ruben Oppose01:53:11.679 - 10:20:42 AM; Senator Ruben agreed with Senator Fenton, expressing concerns about the bill's potential to legalize discrimination and increase homelessness. He highlighted the testimony from renters and the disability community about the bill's impact. He supported the amendment but opposed the bill, believing it should be eliminated.
HB60 1954s: Senator Rashardi Support01:54:16.080 - 10:21:47 AM; Senator Rashardi reminded the committee that the amendment replaces the original bill entirely, which is why he supported it. He believed the new language addressed the concerns raised during the session.
HB60 1954s: Senator Murphy Support01:55:25.199 - 10:22:56 AM; Senator Murphy proposed a further committee amendment to amendment 1954s, suggesting changes to use the Federal Reserve's rental vacancy rate data instead of the Census Bureau's. He argued that the Federal Reserve's data is more reliable and accurate for this purpose.
HB280: Senator Murphy Information Only01:57:42.480 - 10:25:13 AM; Senator Murphy moved to pass House Bill 280, which was seconded. The bill was discussed and a motion for inexpedience to legislate was passed with a unanimous vote.
HB296 1899s: Senator Murphy Support01:58:52.560 - 10:26:23 AM; Senator Murphy moved to pass House Bill 296 and introduced amendment 1899s, which removes conflicting language and restores a 30-day appeal period for the ZBA. He argued that this amendment aligns with previous Senate decisions and addresses concerns about the impact on towns by allowing for impact fees.
HB296 1899s: Senator McHugh Support02:00:07.639 - 10:27:38 AM; Senator McHugh supported the amendment but expressed concerns about the underlying bill, suggesting it needed more work. He mentioned issues with liability and the potential burden on towns, advocating for a re-referral to address these concerns.
HB342 1981s: Senator Re Support02:02:48.080 - 10:30:19 AM; Senator Re introduced amendment 1981s, which clarifies that building on property must adhere to zoning regulations. He emphasized that this amendment ensures that only approved structures can be built in specific zones, aligning with town regulations.
HB342 2132s: Senator Murphy Support02:03:56.480 - 10:31:27 AM; Senator Murphy moved to pass amendment 2132s, which changes the requirement for a town vote to a select board decision for participating in the CPACER program. He explained that this amendment would facilitate construction by reducing delays and costs, and it was supported unanimously by the committee previously.
HB342 2132s: Senator Re Support02:05:04.000 - 10:32:35 AM; Senator Re supported the amendment, noting that it aligns with the CPACER program's goal of promoting development without additional costs to local communities. He confirmed that the energy efficiency part of the mortgage stays with the property but does not burden the town financially.
HB457 2082s: Senator Murphy Support02:07:09.760 - 10:34:40 AM; Senator Murphy moved to pass House Bill 457 and introduced amendment 2082s, which reinforces the committee's previous stance on towns dictating who can live together. He described it as a 'belt and suspenders' approach to ensure clarity and consistency with earlier decisions.
HB467: Senator Murphy Support02:08:26.079 - 10:35:57 AM; Senator Murphy moved to pass House Bill 467, which defines social districts and allows municipalities to create them. He noted that participation is optional for municipalities.
HB577 2050s: Senator Fenton Support02:09:36.000 - 10:37:07 AM; Senator Fenton supported amendment 2050s, which addresses concerns about the bill's impact on ADUs. He believed it represents a compromise and is willing to go through it line by line to address any questions.
HB577 2050s: Senator Rashardi Support02:11:53.840 - 10:39:24 AM; Senator Rashardi introduced amendment 2092, which addresses a constituent's concern about septic systems. The amendment ensures that local pumping ordinances for septic systems apply to ADUs, emphasizing the importance of maintaining these regulations.
HB577 2050s: Senator McHugh Support02:13:01.119 - 10:40:32 AM; Senator McHugh emphasized the importance of the bill for allowing aging in place, caring for family members, and providing housing options for young adults. He highlighted the cultural and familial significance of ADUs and urged support for the bill.
HB577 2050s: Senator R Information Only02:14:06.159 - 10:41:37 AM; Senator R questioned the necessity of a line in Senator Rashardi's amendment that prohibits ADUs on leased land. He mentioned the historical context of leased land in New Hampshire and suggested removing the line to prevent it from hindering the bill's passage.
HB577 2050s: Senator Murphy Oppose02:16:32.558 - 10:44:03 AM; Senator Murphy expressed support for ADUs but raised concerns about state mandates overriding local decisions. He worried about out-of-state investors buying homes and emphasized the need to consider what towns can support. He opposed the bill but supported the amendment.

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)