Committee Summary for Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs (03/11/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB287 00:03:18.640 - 8:32:10 AM	Public Hearing	requiring applicants for absentee ballots to present a copy of their photo identification with their application.	Pearl, Howard (R)[C+]2024
SB222 00:38:59.040 - 9:07:51 AM	Public Hearing	relative to moving the state primary date.	Lang, Timothy(R)[C+]2024
SB222 00:49:50.119 - 9:18:42 AM	Executive Session	relative to moving the state primary date.	Lang, Timothy(R)[C+]2024
SB287 00:51:00.440 - 9:19:52 AM	Executive Session	requiring applicants for absentee ballots to present a copy of their photo identification with their application.	Pearl, Howard (R)[C+]2024
SB46 00:51:51.680 - 9:20:43 AM	Executive Session	enabling municipalities to allow land impacted by new construction or reconstruction to be eligible for current use valuation only after a no cut, vegetated buffer is established and maintained.	Ward, Ruth(R)[C+]2024
SB216 00:54:06.960 - 9:22:58 AM	Executive Session	relative to the authority of moderators on election day.	McGough, Tim(R)
SB224 00:56:39.160 - 9:25:31 AM	Executive Session	relative to increasing the maximum amount of the optional veterans' tax credit.	Gannon, Bill(R)[C+]2024

SB287: Senator Howard Pearl, Town of Loudon, District 17 Support00:03:18.640 - 8:32:10 AM; Senator Pearl introduced Senate Bill 287, emphasizing the importance of election integrity as directed by voters. He highlighted a potential loophole in the absentee ballot system where ballots are mailed to addresses different from the voter's registered address. The bill proposes that to request an absentee ballot to be mailed to a different address, the requester must provide a photo ID or a notarized signature to verify their identity.
SB287: Representative Greg Hill, Town of Northfield, Merrimack 2 Support00:05:08.440 - 8:34:00 AM; Representative Hill supported Senate Bill 287 by presenting a scenario to illustrate the vulnerability in the current absentee ballot system. He discussed a study from 2019 that showed a significant number of absentee ballots were mailed to addresses outside New Hampshire without positive identification. He suggested that requiring a copy of a driver's license or a notarized signature before mailing an absentee ballot to a different address could address this issue. He also mentioned Senate Bill 213 as another potential solution to this concern.
SB287: Senator Roard Information Only00:11:34.200 - 8:40:26 AM; Senator Roard inquired about the time frame of the data provided, confirming it was from the November 2016 election and not repeated in subsequent elections.
SB287: Liz Tentarelli, League of Women Voters of New Hampshire Oppose00:12:48.320 - 8:41:40 AM; Liz Tentarelli expressed opposition to SB287, highlighting the burdens it places on military, government, and UOCAVA voters who may be overseas. She discussed the challenges of obtaining notarization or photocopies of IDs in foreign countries, using her friend's experience in Ireland as an example. She also addressed the issue of signature matching, noting its difficulty for people with conditions like arthritis and the lack of voter fraud cases in New Hampshire that would justify such measures.
SB287: Kay Stadio, Open Democracy Oppose00:18:03.080 - 8:46:55 AM; Kay Stadio, representing Open Democracy, opposed SB287, arguing it introduces unnecessary hurdles to absentee voting. She highlighted the impact on elderly, disabled, student, and military voters, and criticized the requirement for photo ID or notarized signatures as burdensome and potentially disenfranchising. She referenced the 2018 case of Cidu v. Gardner, which found signature matching to disenfranchise voters, and urged the committee to consider the bill inexpedient to legislate.
SB287: Amanda Merrill, Durham voter and former state senator Oppose00:19:02.080 - 8:47:54 AM; Amanda Merrill opposed SB287, noting its strong Senate support but arguing it addresses a non-existent problem of voter fraud. She expressed concern about the bill's impact on elderly voters in rehab or hospitals, questioning the availability of photocopying and notarization services in such facilities. She also mentioned the scheduling conflict with town meeting day, which might prevent election officials from testifying.
SB287: Mr. Perry Oppose00:22:34.760 - 8:51:26 AM; Mr. Perry opposed SB287, sharing his personal experience with absentee voting and criticizing the bill's requirement for photo ID or notarized signatures. He highlighted the practical difficulties for voters without printers or transportation, and referenced the 2018 case of Cidu v. Gardner, which struck down signature matching for absentee ballots.
SB287: David Trumble, Town of Ware Oppose00:25:55.960 - 8:54:47 AM; David Trumble opposed SB287, emphasizing that voting is a fundamental right, not a privilege. He noted New Hampshire's ranking as the most difficult state to vote in and criticized the bill for making it harder without evidence of voter fraud. He discussed the challenges of signature matching and the impracticality of the photo ID and notarization requirements, especially for vulnerable populations.
SB287: Henry Clemente, American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire Oppose00:30:19.399 - 8:59:11 AM; Henry Clemente, from the ACLU of New Hampshire, opposed SB287, focusing on the Cidu v. Gardner case from 2018, which found signature matching unconstitutional. He argued that the bill's requirements would disenfranchise voters without addressing a significant problem of voter fraud.
SB287: Unknown Speaker Oppose00:31:03.039 - 8:59:55 AM; The speaker opposed SB287, arguing that the bill's requirement for photo ID or notarized request for absentee ballots would lead to a signature matching process that has been permanently blocked by federal courts. They highlighted issues such as lack of uniformity among election officials, lack of training in handwriting analysis, and lack of opportunities for voters to cure signature mismatches. The speaker also mentioned the absence of evidence of absentee ballot fraud in New Hampshire and questioned the necessity of the bill, suggesting it would not pass federal court scrutiny.
SB287: David Scanlan, Secretary of State Information Only00:33:37.880 - 9:02:29 AM; Secretary of State David Scanlan clarified that SB287 is permissive, not mandatory, and applies to a subset of voters who want their absentee ballots mailed to an address other than their registered residence. He explained that the bill allows voters to show ID at the clerk's office or get a notarized signature, which provides assurance and helps election officials. He noted that the bill does not change the current process for those who do not choose these options. Scanlan also addressed the misconception about New Hampshire's voting difficulty, emphasizing the state's high voter participation rate and ease of voting.
SB222: Trisha Malo, Senate Majority Caucus Director Support00:38:59.040 - 9:07:51 AM; Trisha Malo, representing Senator Lang, introduced SB222, which proposes moving the state primary to the second Tuesday of June and adjusting related election deadlines to March. She mentioned that this would affect the filing deadline and party registration deadlines.
SB222: David Scanlan, Secretary of State Information Only00:39:59.720 - 9:08:51 AM; Secretary of State David Scanlan expressed a preference for an August primary date over June, citing concerns about voter turnout and the workload on local election officials during town meeting season. He discussed the potential need to extend the governor's term to four years if the primary is moved to June. Scanlan also suggested an amendment to ensure supervisors of the checklist meet before the filing period opens, allowing voters to change party affiliations. He raised concerns about the impact on third-party nomination processes, suggesting adjustments to the time frame for collecting signatures if the primary is moved to June.
SB222: Kevin Khan, resident of Exeter, representing the New Hampshire Classic Liberal Party Oppose00:46:03.280 - 9:14:55 AM; Kevin Khan spoke in opposition to SB222, highlighting concerns about its impact on third-party candidacies. He referenced a similar situation in Ohio in 1983, which led to a Supreme Court case, Anderson v. Celebrezze, where the court ruled that burdens on third parties and independent candidates infringe on First Amendment rights. Khan suggested amending the bill to tie the petitioning period to the general election rather than the primary, or tabling the bill to allow for a review of the relevant RSAs concerning third-party ballot access. He emphasized the importance of longer petitioning periods, especially during the summer, for federal elections.
SB222: Committee Members Information Only00:49:50.119 - 9:18:42 AM; The committee discussed the possibility of amending SB222 to incorporate changes suggested by the Secretary of State regarding the dates for third-party candidate submissions. The discussion was brief, and the bill was put on hold for further consideration.
SB287: Committee Members Information Only00:51:00.440 - 9:19:52 AM; The committee discussed SB287, focusing on the use of technology like Zoom for communication and the potential for amendments to address public concerns. The discussion was light-hearted at times, with a member expressing hope for a solution that could garner enough votes.
SB46: Committee Members Vote00:51:51.680 - 9:20:43 AM; The committee moved to recommend SB46 as inexpedient to legislate (ITL). Concerns were raised about the bill setting a concrete value in statute for certain land, which was seen as unworkable. The committee expressed hope for a future version that might be more reflective of reality.
SB216: Committee Members Information Only00:54:06.960 - 9:22:58 AM; The committee discussed SB216, focusing on the authority of moderators in managing electioneering zones. Examples from Rochester and Gilmanton were used to illustrate the complexities of controlling areas outside the voting property. The committee considered re-referring the bill but ultimately moved to recommend it as inexpedient to legislate (ITL), citing local solutions to the issue.
SB224: Committee Members Information Only00:56:39.160 - 9:25:31 AM; The committee discussed SB224, which deals with veterans' credits. There was a lack of testimony from veterans' groups, and the committee member expressed a need for more time to review and potentially amend the bill. A motion to recommend the bill as inexpedient to legislate (ITL) was made but did not receive a second.
SB224: Representative from Manchester Information Only00:58:14.440 - 9:27:06 AM; The speaker discussed the current veteran tax credit limits in Manchester, which are set at $500 and $2,000 for disabled veterans. They expressed interest in increasing these limits if the bill were to pass, noting that Manchester currently offers both the $500 and $2,000 credits.
SB224: Veteran and former Rochester City Council member Oppose00:59:00.920 - 9:27:52 AM; The speaker, identifying as a veteran, expressed opposition to increasing the veteran tax credit from $750 to $1,000. They argued that such an increase would require an act of the governing body and highlighted their reluctance to support these credits frequently, emphasizing support for 100% disabled veterans instead.
SB224: Committee Member Oppose00:59:54.480 - 9:28:46 AM; The speaker noted the lack of testimony from towns and veterans groups on the bill, suggesting that this absence of support indicates the bill might not be appropriate, especially given the financial constraints many towns and the state are facing. They discussed the broader implications of tax credits on budget allocations.
SB224: Committee Member Information Only01:00:44.079 - 9:29:36 AM; The speaker acknowledged the points made about the impact of tax credits on housing costs and the need to consider all types of credits together rather than changing one in isolation. They noted that the credits do not stack and appreciated the nuanced discussion on the topic.

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)