Committee Summary for Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs (02/11/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB219 00:04:12.879 - 8:18:18 AM	Public Hearing	requiring the secretary of state to enter into a membership agreement with the Electronic Registration Information Center.	Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D)[D-]2024
SB220 00:40:10.200 - 8:54:16 AM	Public Hearing	relative to public hearings and deliberation for the denial of tax exemptions.	Abbas, Daryl(R)[C+]2024
SB225 00:45:46.240 - 8:59:52 AM	Public Hearing	requiring public notice before re-assessment of property values for local tax purposes.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024
SB223 01:05:37.720 - 9:19:43 AM	Public Hearing	relative to using college or university student identification cards to obtain a ballot.	Sullivan, Victoria(R)
SB223 01:55:08.920 - 10:09:14 AM	Executive Session	relative to using college or university student identification cards to obtain a ballot.	Sullivan, Victoria(R)
220 02:15:15.239 - 10:29:21 AM	Executive Session	denial of tax exemptions	Likely Text to Speech Error on Bill #
225 02:16:13.559 - 10:30:19 AM	Executive Session	requiring public notice before reassessment	Likely Text to Speech Error on Bill #
223 02:20:21.319 - 10:34:27 AM	Executive Session	Unclear	Likely Text to Speech Error on Bill #

SB219: Senator Rebecca Perkins Kwoka, representing District 21 (Portsmouth and surrounding towns) Support00:04:12.879 - 8:18:18 AM; Senator Kwoka introduced SB219, which aims to require the Secretary of State to join the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC). She highlighted ERIC's role since its establishment in 2012 as a nonprofit organization designed by state election officials to enhance the accuracy of voter rolls and increase voter registration. ERIC utilizes data from motor vehicle departments and federal sources to generate reports that help maintain up-to-date voter lists, thereby improving election security. It is nonpartisan, controlled by state election officials, and used by states across the political spectrum. She emphasized ERIC's contribution to voter privacy and confidence in the electoral system and mentioned its endorsement by various bipartisan groups and officials.
SB219: Liz Tentarelli, President of the League of Women Voters of New Hampshire Support00:07:19.319 - 8:21:25 AM; Liz Tentarelli supported SB219, emphasizing ERIC's importance in maintaining accurate voter rolls. She mentioned ERIC's formation in 2012 by seven states to use advanced technology for data management and sharing to improve voter roll accuracy. She referenced a 2012 Pew Trust study indicating significant inaccuracies in voter registration, underscoring the necessity of a robust system like ERIC for crosschecking voter data across states.
SB219: Olivia Zink, Executive Director of Open Democracy, voter in Franklin Support00:09:43.360 - 8:23:49 AM; Olivia Zink expressed support for SB219, noting that ERIC's data sources help maintain clean voter checklists and detect potential voter fraud. She mentioned that New Hampshire is the only state in New England not currently a member of ERIC. Zink highlighted the bill's provision to fund ERIC membership through the Help America Vote Act and emphasized the need for New Hampshire to join ERIC to ensure voter roll accuracy, especially given the migration between New England states.
SB219: Michael O'Brien, Predy Strategies, representing America Votes Support00:15:20.199 - 8:29:26 AM; Michael O'Brien supported SB219, recalling the past debate around Interstate Crosscheck and its eventual dissolution. He stressed the importance of a system like ERIC to ensure clean voter rolls, noting New Hampshire's absence from such a program since 2019. O'Brien mentioned that ERIC became a political target in 2023, leading to some states' withdrawal, but emphasized that ERIC remains the effective solution for voter roll maintenance. He clarified that ERIC sends a one-time postcard to unregistered individuals, not a recurring cost, and reiterated the organization's strong support for the bill.
SB219: Matt Mushan, Claremont, representing 603 Forward Support00:20:12.080 - 8:34:18 AM; Matt Mushan, a voter from Claremont and representing the nonpartisan nonprofit 603 Forward, testified in support of Senate Bill 219. He highlighted that the bill would require New Hampshire to join the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), which already includes 20 member states and all New England states except New Hampshire. Mushan emphasized the benefits of ERIC in improving election security, streamlining election administration, and enhancing voter confidence. He argued that ERIC's cross-checking system is effective and cost-effective, despite some initial startup costs, and that it represents a small price to pay for supporting democracy and maintaining accurate voter lists.
SB219: David Scanlan, Secretary of State Oppose00:22:53.120 - 8:36:59 AM; David Scanlan, the Secretary of State, opposed Senate Bill 219. He acknowledged that ERIC has been helpful to some states but expressed concerns about the political nature of the program and the rigid administration requirements. Scanlan highlighted the mandatory data dump every 60 days and the requirement for voter outreach dictated by ERIC as problematic. He emphasized the importance of state control over voter data and confidentiality, arguing that the bill's language requiring the sharing of motor vehicle and other agency data is problematic. Scanlan also discussed the use of HAVA funds, noting that New Hampshire has effectively managed these funds to maintain and improve election systems, suggesting that alternative cross-checking programs with adjacent states might be more suitable.
SB220: Senator Daryl Abbas, District 22 Information Only00:40:10.200 - 8:54:16 AM; Senator Daryl Abbas introduced Senate Bill 220, which aims to allow property owners denied a tax exemption to request a public hearing for reconsideration, instead of the usual non-public process. He noted that the bill needs further work and requested it be re-referred to allow for more refinement. Abbas discussed the sensitivity of the procedure and the need to protect personal information, suggesting that the bill's current draft, which mirrors zoning procedures, might not be appropriate. He emphasized the importance of consulting with tax attorneys and local boards to ensure the procedure is correct before moving forward with the policy.
SB220: Jim Misho, Chief Assessor for the Town of Hudson Information Only00:43:10.480 - 8:57:16 AM; Jim Misho, the Chief Assessor for the Town of Hudson, provided testimony regarding the technical and administrative aspects of SB220. He clarified that his comments were his own and not necessarily reflective of the Hudson Board of Selectmen's position, as they had not yet weighed in on the bill. He mentioned his support for Senator Abbas's request for reconsideration and submitted his written testimony for the record. He did not expand further on his testimony due to time constraints.
SB225: Trisha Malo, Majority Caucus Director for the Senate Information Only00:45:46.240 - 8:59:52 AM; Trisha Malo, the Majority Caucus Director for the Senate, introduced SB225, which requires municipalities to provide a 90-day notice before any re-evaluation of assessed property values. The bill also mandates multiple notices for any change in assessed value, including a letter to the property owner. She indicated that Senator Avard was expected to arrive soon to answer any additional questions regarding the bill.
SB225: Jim Misho, Chief Assessor for the Town of Hudson Oppose00:46:42.280 - 9:00:48 AM; Jim Misho, Chief Assessor for the Town of Hudson, provided testimony against SB225, focusing on the timing issues the bill would create. He explained that most reevaluations are completed between September 1st and October 1st, and a 90-day notice requirement could delay the issuance of tax bills, affecting municipal revenues. He argued that a 90-day notice is too long, particularly for communities operating on a calendar fiscal year, and suggested a shorter notice period of 30 to 45 days might be more appropriate. He also discussed the practical challenges of completing assessments earlier due to limited resources and the fixed April 1st assessment date. Misho highlighted the common industry practice in Hudson of sending preliminary and final value notices, which he felt was in line with the spirit of the bill but not its specific requirements.
SB225: Senator Kevin Avard, District 12 Support00:56:47.000 - 9:10:53 AM; Senator Kevin Avard, the prime sponsor of SB225, explained the bill's origin stemmed from an incident in Nashua where residents had only seven days to challenge a reevaluation, which he felt was insufficient. He emphasized the bill's intent to protect constituents, particularly seniors and those away from home, by ensuring they have adequate notice to respond to property reevaluations. Avard expressed frustration over the short notice period and argued for a 90-day notice to prevent surprise evaluations. He also mentioned the broader context of local tax caps and spending limits, underscoring the financial strain unexpected tax increases can place on residents, especially those on fixed incomes.
SB225: Senator Kevin Avard, District 12 Support00:56:47.000 - 9:10:53 AM; Senator Avard expressed his support for the bill, highlighting an issue with the notification period given to locals for tax assessments. He mentioned receiving a letter that required a response within seven days, which he found surprising and burdensome. He urged the committee to support the bill, allowing municipalities more flexibility in setting their dates.
SB225: Victoria Gala, Chesterfield Information Only01:01:01.680 - 9:15:07 AM; Victoria Gala, a resident of Chesterfield, shared her observations and concerns about the tax assessment notification process after listening to the discussion. She noted the frequent complaints about last-minute notifications and significant increases in assessments due to property valuation and municipal spending. As a former real estate agent, she criticized the April 1st valuation date, suggesting it does not reflect the reality of the New Hampshire real estate market, which peaks in the spring. She recommended shifting the assessment period to a yearly basis to better reflect market conditions and ease the workload on assessors, thereby reducing surprises for homeowners.
SB223: Senator Victoria Sullivan, Senate District 18 (Manchester Wards 5-9, Lichfield) Support01:05:37.720 - 9:19:43 AM; Senator Sullivan introduced SB223, focusing on preventing out-of-state residents temporarily living on college campuses from voting in New Hampshire elections. She argued that college students do not meet the legal definition of domicile, which requires a permanent home, and suggested they should vote absentee in their home states. She also proposed that students who can verify eligibility to vote in New Hampshire should qualify for in-state tuition, aligning the standards for voting and tuition. Sullivan emphasized the importance of intent in establishing residency and the ease of absentee voting, suggesting colleges should assist students in voting absentee.
SB223: Olivia Zinc, Executive Director of Open Democracy, Franklin Oppose01:17:10.800 - 9:31:16 AM; Olivia Zinc opposed SB223, arguing it restricts students' voting rights and rolls back accepted forms of identification. She highlighted the low voter registration rate among 18-year-olds in New Hampshire and the potential impact on students without driver's licenses, including those with disabilities. Zinc stressed the importance of allowing students to use their IDs to vote, pointing out that the bill singles out young voters and could disenfranchise them. She suggested the bill should be found inexpedient to legislate to ensure all have the right to vote.
SB223: Rachel Dean, Durham Town Clerk Tax Collector, New Hampshire City and Town Clerks Association Oppose01:29:56.040 - 9:44:02 AM; Rachel Dean, representing the Durham Town Clerk and the New Hampshire City and Town Clerks Association, opposed SB223. She clarified that the bill specifically addresses the use of student IDs to obtain a ballot, not voter registration or domicile. Dean emphasized the security and validity of student IDs and noted the absence of any fraudulent use in Durham. She argued that removing student IDs as a valid form of ID would disenfranchise first-time voters and target a specific class of people. Dean also highlighted challenges with absentee voting in New Hampshire, suggesting it is not as straightforward as claimed.
SB223: Victoria Gulla, Chesterfield Support01:35:19.760 - 9:49:25 AM; Victoria Gulla supports SB223 and argues for the removal of both college and high school IDs as valid forms of voter identification. She shares her personal experience of voting in Hancock after studying in Montreal, Canada, and emphasizes that students should vote in their home towns rather than where they attend college. She argues against the use of student IDs for voting, pointing out that many students retain out-of-state driver's licenses and should not vote in New Hampshire if they are not residents. She also mentions the case of students from prestigious schools like Philips Exeter and St. Paul's, suggesting they should not vote in New Hampshire if they are only temporarily in the state.
SB223: Katherine Prenter, Chancellor of the University System of New Hampshire Oppose01:43:00.920 - 9:57:06 AM; Katherine Prenter opposes Section 1 of SB223, which relates to in-state tuition and requires proof of voter registration to receive in-state tuition rates. She argues that this would add a significant administrative burden to the University System, especially at a time when they are trying to reduce costs. Prenter clarifies that the University System encourages voting but does not set policy on voting rights. She also points out the potential financial implications if out-of-state students could register to vote and receive in-state tuition, estimating a potential loss of $100 to $150 million.
SB223: Will Nelson and Armir Kimi, Students at Dartmouth College Oppose01:47:03.480 - 10:01:09 AM; Will Nelson and Armir Kimi oppose SB223, emphasizing their commitment to civic engagement and voting rights at Dartmouth College. They describe their efforts with the Dartmouth Civics Association to educate students and community members about voting in New Hampshire or their home states. They argue that removing student IDs as a form of voter identification would create a significant burden on town officials and organizations like theirs. They also highlight their successful partnership with the town of Hanover to facilitate voter registration and engagement, expressing concern that changing voting requirements would disrupt this process.
SB223: Sam Fingon, Rochester Ward 4, UNH Student Support01:52:25.520 - 10:06:31 AM; Sam Fingon, a UNH student from Rochester, supports SB223, emphasizing the need for secure elections. He argues that many out-of-state students at UNH use their student IDs to vote, which he believes should be changed to ensure that only New Hampshire residents vote in state elections. He discusses the demographics of UNH students, noting that about half are from New Hampshire and a quarter from Massachusetts. Fingon also addresses the ambiguity of the current domicile laws, suggesting they need clarification to prevent out-of-state voting.
SB223: Committee Information Only01:55:08.920 - 10:09:14 AM; The committee discussed and voted on various bills related to voting. For SB223, there were no specific recommendations or amendments discussed in the provided text. The committee moved to hold several bills for further discussion and consideration, including bills related to ballot recounts, new construction impact, and the number of polling stations. They also passed an amendment to another bill (SB213) and recommended it for passage as amended. The session concluded with a motion to recommend 'inexpedient to legislate' (ITL) on a bill requiring the secretary of state to join a multi-state voter registration system, citing concerns over privacy and data sharing.
SB223: Unidentified Speaker 1 Support02:09:04.079 - 10:23:10 AM; The speaker supports the adoption of a new technology for voter registration, citing the secure transmission of data and inter-agency cooperation as benefits. They mention that 35 states have used this system at some point, emphasizing its efficiency and minimal cost to the state, estimated at $25,000. They express hope for further consideration and learning about the system despite concerns raised by others.
SB223: Unidentified Speaker 2 Oppose02:10:35.320 - 10:24:41 AM; The speaker opposes the bill, citing concerns raised by the Secretary of State about the system's requirements. They mention a 60-day data dump that other states might find unsatisfactory and express concerns about confidentiality. They also discuss the trend of states moving away from the system, currently down to 22 states from a high of 35, suggesting that it might not be a wise investment for New Hampshire.
SB223: Unidentified Speaker 3 Oppose02:12:08.480 - 10:26:14 AM; This speaker argues against the system, highlighting that the withdrawal of states is politically motivated. They express frustration over the political reasons for not joining and stress the importance of a bipartisan approach to election integrity. They mention their long experience with election law since 2013 and their preference for the cross-check program, noting that current state statutes limit the effectiveness of such systems.
SB223: Unidentified Speaker 4 Oppose02:13:43.679 - 10:27:49 AM; The speaker opposes the bill, emphasizing their experience and the limitations due to privacy agreements and state laws. They stress that their opposition is not politically motivated but based on years of reviewing these systems and understanding what is feasible and beneficial for New Hampshire.
220: Unidentified Speaker 5 Information Only02:15:15.239 - 10:29:21 AM; The speaker mentions that the prime sponsor of the bill requested a re-referral to work on the language, with a deadline set until crossover day. They express reluctance to re-refer bills due to time constraints but agree to hold the bill without objection.
225: Unidentified Speaker 6 Support02:16:13.559 - 10:30:19 AM; The speaker supports the bill but disagrees with the proposed timeline. They discuss the reassessment in Rochester that made statewide news and suggest amending the bill to require a 45-day notice period before a change in valuation, allowing citizens sufficient time to appeal or ask questions before receiving their tax bill.
225: Senator Long Support02:18:38.160 - 10:32:44 AM; Senator Long supports the idea of extending the notice period to 45 days, citing the example of Manchester where reassessments are well-publicized in advance. They argue that seven days is insufficient and advocate for transparency and more time for citizens to respond to changes in their tax assessments.
225: Unidentified Speaker 7 Support02:19:23.799 - 10:33:29 AM; The speaker supports the amendment to 45 days, mentioning the shortage of assessors and the frequent turnover in Rochester. They express a desire to see the amendment in writing and suggest further collaboration with other committee members to refine the language.
223: Unidentified Speaker 8 Information Only02:20:21.319 - 10:34:27 AM; The speaker discusses their personal experience with domicile, particularly related to military families. They question the clarity of RSA 6641 and express concern about distinguishing domicile rules for university students versus others. They also mention the use of student IDs for identification and suggest further discussion on these matters.

Gray, James(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Lang, Timothy(V Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D)[D-]2024
Rochefort, David(R)	Long, Pat(D)