Committee Summary for Senate Judiciary (04/01/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB75 00:14:12.000 - 12:12:23 PM	Executive Session	legalizing cannabis for persons 21 years of age or older.	Verville, Kevin(R)[B+]2024
291 00:52:14.640 - 12:50:25 PM	Public Hearing	Unclear	Likely Text to Speech Error on Bill #
Unclear 01:05:49.559 - 1:04:00 PM	Public Hearing	Unclear
HB162 01:27:55.280 - 1:26:06 PM	Public Hearing	relative to informed consent for law enforcement searches of houses or other property.	Roy, Terry(R)[B]2024
HB162 02:02:59.880 - 2:01:10 PM	Executive Session	relative to informed consent for law enforcement searches of houses or other property.	Roy, Terry(R)[B]2024
HB468 02:06:46.840 - 2:04:57 PM	Public Hearing	establishing the crime of and penalties for unlawful use of unmanned aircraft systems.	Roy, Terry(R)[B]2024
Unclear 02:23:40.240 - 2:21:51 PM	Public Hearing	Unclear
HB778 1382s 02:29:25.800 - 2:27:36 PM	Public Hearing	authorizing the director of the police standards and training council to detail law enforcement training specialists employed by the council for law enforcement and crowd control services.	Roy, Terry(R)[B]2024

HB75: Senator Oppose00:14:12.000 - 12:12:23 PM; The senator expressed concerns about the lack of safety rails and quality control in the proposed bill for legalizing cannabis. They highlighted potential issues such as increased poly use and the inability to know the contents of the drugs, describing the bill as an attempt to 'jump the river without putting the bridge up.'
HB75: Legislator Oppose00:14:54.959 - 12:13:05 PM; The legislator compared the current bill to a previous, more limited version they might have supported. They criticized the lack of regulation in the current proposal, likening it to the 'wild west' and supported the ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate) motion.
HB75: Legislator Oppose00:15:41.519 - 12:13:52 PM; This legislator, in their ninth year of service, expressed frustration with the recurring failure to legalize adult use of cannabis due to seeking perfection. They opposed the ITL motion, advocating for taking 'baby steps' towards legalization.
HB75: Legislator Oppose00:16:55.240 - 12:15:06 PM; The legislator felt that the opportunity for a regulated approach to cannabis legalization had passed and criticized the current bill for lacking any regulation, describing it as putting 'the baby in a marathon.' They suggested discussing regulations at a committee of conference and supported the ITL motion.
HB75: Representative Wendy Thomas and Alicia Bennett Support00:17:41.240 - 12:15:52 PM; Representative Wendy Thomas and Alicia Bennett, cancer survivors, shared their experiences with using cannabis therapeutically. They highlighted the challenges of affordability and access to specific strains that are effective for their conditions. They support the bill as it would improve their quality of life by allowing home cultivation.
HB75: Dr. Jerry Kirk and Dr. Joe Hannon Support00:18:27.520 - 12:16:38 PM; Dr. Jerry Kirk and Dr. Joe Hannon, members of the Therapeutic Cannabis Medical Oversight Board, expressed support for the bill. They emphasized that home cultivation would enhance affordability and accessibility for patients, especially given the limited number of alternative treatment centers (ATCs).
HB75: Senator Abbis Oppose00:19:15.280 - 12:17:26 PM; Senator Abbis expressed concerns about the bill, particularly regarding the possession limit of 8 ounces of cannabis. He argued that the bill could be interpreted as a backdoor way to increase possession limits without ensuring that the cannabis is actually grown by the patient. He also raised issues about the lack of enforcement mechanisms to track the cannabis's origin and distribution, indicating his opposition to the bill as currently written.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:22:16.960 - 12:20:27 PM; The senator clarified the intent of the bill, focusing on the transportation of cannabis seedlings from ATCs to cultivation locations. He explained that the 8-ounce limit is intended for those transporting seedlings, not for possession without cultivation, and is meant to protect caregivers and patients from legal repercussions during transport.
HB75: Senator Abbis Oppose00:27:20.720 - 12:25:31 PM; Senator Abbis reiterated his opposition to the bill, emphasizing his concerns about the potential for abuse of the law, particularly regarding the transfer of cannabis among patients without any monitoring or control. He expressed reluctance to support the bill due to these issues.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:28:29.679 - 12:26:40 PM; The senator responded to Senator Abbis's concerns, defending the integrity of patients and caregivers who use cannabis therapeutically. He argued that the bill's intent is to help those in need and not to facilitate illegal distribution.
HB75: Senator Abbis Oppose00:29:52.080 - 12:28:03 PM; Senator Abbis clarified that his opposition is not about questioning the integrity of patients but about the potential for laws to be exploited. He remains opposed to the bill as written due to these concerns.
HB75: Senator Abbis Oppose00:31:11.039 - 12:29:22 PM; Senator Abbis moved to an ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate) motion on another bill, HB151, related to the purchase of hemp-derived CBD. He expressed concerns about the inclusion of synthetic THC in therapeutic cannabis products, indicating his opposition to this aspect of the law.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:31:44.559 - 12:29:55 PM; The senator discusses the key points of the bill, focusing on sections 14 through 18, which allow alternative treatment centers (ATCs) to acquire and use non-intoxicating cannabinoids not produced by an ATC in New Hampshire for manufacturing cannabis concentrates and infused products. The senator highlights that this is in response to the cost-prohibitive nature of ATCs growing and using their own products, which makes their products more expensive compared to surrounding states. The bill aims to allow ATCs to bring in ingredients to reduce costs.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:32:52.880 - 12:31:03 PM; The senator uses an analogy of vanilla extract to explain the bill's intent. They compare using 100% Madagascar vanilla to making a creme brulee versus using McCormick imitation vanilla, which contains synthetic additives. The senator argues that just as McCormick vanilla is still acceptable for baking, ATCs should be allowed to use synthetic cannabinoids as ingredients to reduce costs and meet patient needs for products like tinctures, fruit chews, and capsules.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:33:39.279 - 12:31:50 PM; The senator continues the discussion on the bill, emphasizing that ATCs are seeking permission to buy less expensive ingredients from other states to meet patient needs. They mention that surrounding states already have robust markets and testing for these ingredients. The senator argues that New Hampshire relies on other states for various products and should be able to do the same for cannabis ingredients, which could be tested in New Hampshire upon arrival.
HB75: Senator Oppose00:37:09.680 - 12:35:20 PM; The senator expresses opposition to the bill, particularly to the use of synthetic cannabinoids, even in trace amounts. They argue that there is no reason for ATCs to sell synthetic versions of THC, comparing it to the difference between natural and synthetic drugs like heroin and fentanyl. The senator is concerned about the lack of information on reciprocal arrangements with other states and decides to support the Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) motion.
HB75: Senator Information Only00:39:03.520 - 12:37:14 PM; The senator clarifies that New Hampshire does not produce the ingredients in question, hence there is nothing to offer other states in return. They emphasize the need for these ingredients to reduce costs for ATCs and ultimately for patients. The senator acknowledges the points made but remains supportive of the ITL motion.
291: Erica Leon, Representative from Rockingham 13 (Derry) Support00:52:14.640 - 12:50:25 PM; Representative Erica Leon introduces the bill, explaining that it addresses the application of fertilizers, which was previously vetoed by the governor. The bill aims to correct the language from the previous bill, which focused on the sale of fertilizers, to address the application by individuals and companies. The bill was amended in the House Criminal Justice to provide a graduated penalty system starting with a warning, then a violation with a fine, and finally a misdemeanor. The bill specifically targets misapplication by companies like lawn care services, allowing for immediate misdemeanor charges if multiple violations occur in a short period.
291: Senator Information Only00:55:04.640 - 12:53:15 PM; The senator asks a legal question about the application of the bill's penalties, specifically whether multiple violations in a single day by a company could be treated as separate offenses leading to a misdemeanor. Representative Leon clarifies that the intention is to catch companies misapplying fertilizer to multiple clients in a short time, but she is open to amending the language to ensure this is clear.
291: Senator Information Only00:56:11.839 - 12:54:22 PM; The senator seeks clarification on how the bill would apply to homeowners versus corporate agents like lawn care companies. Representative Leon explains that the bill aims to protect average homeowners from immediate misdemeanor charges while ensuring that companies misapplying fertilizer to multiple properties can be held accountable. She suggests that the language could be adjusted to make this clearer.
291: Senator Information Only00:56:34.960 - 12:54:45 PM; The senator asks about the timeline for penalties under the bill, specifically how it would apply to a homeowner who violates the law multiple times over several years. Representative Leon confirms that the bill aims to provide a more lenient approach for homeowners, with penalties escalating from a warning to a fine, and finally to a misdemeanor for repeated offenses. She emphasizes the intent to give homeowners a 'gentle glide slope' while ensuring that companies can be held accountable for multiple violations in a short period.
291: Joe Support00:58:11.760 - 12:56:22 PM; Joe, who has personal experience with lawn care, supports the bill. He emphasizes the importance of leniency for individuals who unintentionally misuse fertilizer, while ensuring strict accountability for those who maliciously or repeatedly violate fertilizer regulations. He trusts the judiciary committee to refine the language of the bill to meet these intentions.
291: Representative Judy Aaron, Sullivan County District 4 (towns of Acworth, Goshen, Langdon, Lempster, and Washington), Chair of Environment and Agriculture Committee Support00:58:50.079 - 12:57:01 PM; Representative Judy Aaron, co-sponsor of the bill, supports it and emphasizes the importance of preventing fertilizer abuse and its impact on lakes and streams. She notes that the original bill passed through her committee but neglected to address penalties, which this bill aims to rectify by aligning penalties with the act's intentions.
291: Andrea Lamaro, President and Policy Advocate of New Hampshire Lakes Support01:00:03.440 - 12:58:14 PM; Andrea Lamaro, representing New Hampshire Lakes, supports the bill and appreciates the opportunity to work with representatives to amend it. She discusses the importance of graduated penalties to protect homeowners who unintentionally misuse fertilizer and to target repeat offenders. Lamaro highlights the organization's outreach efforts, including a Lake Smart program, to educate property owners on lake-friendly living and how this bill will be integrated into their initiatives.
Unclear: Buzz Sher, Portsmouth Ward 3, Rockingham District 26, Co-sponsor Support01:05:49.559 - 1:04:00 PM; Buzz Sher, a co-sponsor of the bill, supports expanding the requirement for officers to inform individuals of their right to refuse consent to a search, which currently applies to vehicles, to also include homes. He explains that this measure, already in place for vehicles and not burdensome, aims to provide additional protection to individuals during home searches. Sher notes that this would not affect other types of searches like those under no-knock warrants and aims to reduce litigation over consent given under duress.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 1, Portsmouth Information Only01:14:37.920 - 1:12:48 PM; The speaker discussed the importance of providing more information to individuals when law enforcement requests to search their home. They emphasized that this bill would help individuals understand that they have the right to refuse a search and that refusal cannot be used against them in court. The speaker highlighted the intimidating nature of police presence at one's doorstep and how this bill aims to balance the power dynamic by informing the individual of their rights.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 2, Portsmouth Information Only01:19:17.600 - 1:17:28 PM; The speaker continued the discussion on the bill, focusing on the need for clear communication from law enforcement about the reasons for requesting a search. They noted that while individuals might ask why their home is being searched, the police should explain their request before obtaining consent. The speaker also mentioned that this process is a preliminary step before law enforcement might seek a search warrant if consent is not given.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 3, Portsmouth Information Only01:21:29.719 - 1:19:40 PM; This speaker addressed the aspect of the bill concerning a 'significant period of time' before law enforcement can re-approach for a search. They explained that the bill aims to prevent continuous pressure on individuals by requiring a break in time between requests. They referenced a U.S. Supreme Court case to illustrate the issue of repeated requests and how the bill would mitigate such scenarios by ensuring a change in circumstances or facts before re-approaching.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 4, Portsmouth Information Only01:26:06.560 - 1:24:17 PM; The speaker discussed the applicability of the bill's language to different property types, such as a landlord-tenant situation. They clarified that under the Fourth Amendment, landlords cannot consent to a search of a tenant's room, and the phrase 'or any other property' in the bill is intended to cover other structures like barns or sheds.
HB162: Stephen Andress, Assistant County Attorney, Merrimack County Oppose01:27:55.280 - 1:26:06 PM; Stephen Andress, an assistant county attorney with over 20 years of experience as a prosecutor, opposes HB162. He argues that under current New Hampshire law, all searches must be conducted with a warrant or meet an exception, one of which is consent. He explains that consent must be given knowingly, intelligently, and freely, and there is no current requirement to inform individuals of their right to refuse consent or to use a written form. Andress provides examples, including a case from 1979 where a woman was kidnapped and the subsequent police investigation, and another case involving child sexual abuse images, to illustrate how consent searches work in practice. He expresses concerns about the proposed bill's requirement for a written consent form, arguing it could complicate and delay police investigations. He also criticizes the bill's exclusionary provision, which he believes goes beyond constitutional requirements. Andress concludes by suggesting the bill be found inexpedient to legislate.
HB162: Lieutenant Derek Cataldo, New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police Oppose01:42:47.080 - 1:40:58 PM; Lieutenant Derek Cataldo testifies in opposition to HB162 on behalf of the New Hampshire Association of Chiefs of Police. He provides real-world examples from Manchester to demonstrate the potential impact of the bill on law enforcement activities. Cataldo explains that the bill would require a form for consent searches, which could delay police action in street-level drug interdiction and other situations. He expresses concerns about the safety of officers and the potential for suspects to dispose of evidence during the time taken to fill out forms. Cataldo also discusses how the bill would affect routine calls for service, such as domestic disputes and burglaries, and could hinder undercover operations. He concludes that the bill would impose significant administrative burdens on officers, potentially discouraging proactive policing and leading to increased litigation.
HB162: Major Bill Wright, New Hampshire State Police Oppose01:58:36.639 - 1:56:47 PM; Major Bill Wright expressed concerns about the potential complications that HB162 could introduce to regular police interactions. He highlighted the broad definition of 'property' in the bill, which could include items like backpacks or pockets, potentially requiring written or recorded consent for searches in everyday situations. He noted that many police departments already seek written consent for searches, but the bill's requirements could hinder normal interactions, especially in scenarios where officers do not have access to body cameras or written consent forms. Wright suggested that the language in the bill needs clarification to avoid complicating routine police work and potentially increasing legal challenges to searches.
HB162: Committee Members Vote02:02:59.880 - 2:01:10 PM; During the executive session, the committee discussed the implications of HB162 on police interactions and potential unintended consequences, such as the expansion of consent requirements to passengers in vehicles. Concerns were raised about the bill's impact on undercover operations and the need for possible amendments to address law enforcement objections. The committee ultimately voted to recommend the bill as inexpedient to legislate (ITL), with some members expressing a desire to further discuss potential amendments.
HB468: Representative Wheeler Support02:06:46.840 - 2:04:57 PM; Representative Wheeler introduced HB468, which aims to increase penalties for unlawful drone usage in New Hampshire. He explained that the bill addresses gaps in current law, particularly concerning drones flying over jails, prisons, and police operations. The bill passed the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee unanimously after an amendment that clarified language and allowed media to fly drones without impeding law enforcement. Wheeler highlighted the need for such legislation nationwide, citing examples like drone incursions at military installations.
HB468: Christopher Ball, New Hampshire State Police Support02:11:40.800 - 2:09:51 PM; Christopher Ball, representing the New Hampshire State Police and Department of Safety, supported HB468. He emphasized the need for the bill to adopt federal regulations to address nefarious or criminal drone operations within the state. Ball noted that the legislation was a collaborative effort involving various stakeholders and would provide law enforcement with the necessary tools to act against illegal drone activities.
HB468: Adam Chardelli Support02:12:35.679 - 2:10:46 PM; Adam Chardelli, a private sector partner and former state employee, supported HB468 and offered to assist with any threat-based questions related to drone usage. He highlighted his experience in counterterrorism efforts and the importance of the bill in addressing drone threats.
HB468: David Denwoody, US Space Force Support02:14:16.440 - 2:12:27 PM; David Denwoody, representing the New Boston Space Force Station, supported HB468 but suggested an amendment to include specific language protecting military installations. He explained the critical role of the New Boston Space Force Station in national defense and the increasing threat of drone incursions. Denwoody noted that the current bill's penalties were insufficient for protecting military installations and urged the committee to consider an amendment similar to one in a related Senate bill.
HB468: Jane Graham, New Hampshire Department of Corrections Support02:21:13.640 - 2:19:24 PM; Jane Graham, the Strategic Communications Administrator for the New Hampshire Department of Corrections, testified in support of HB468. She highlighted the increasing use of drones for unlawful activities around correctional facilities, noting that while federal facilities have protections against such drone activities, state facilities do not. Graham emphasized the need for similar protections at state facilities, citing examples of drones being used to smuggle contraband like drugs, weapons, and cell phones into facilities, as well as for surveillance to aid in escapes. She concluded by stressing the importance of the bill in enhancing the safety and security of correctional facilities.
Unclear: Representative Terry Roy, Rockingham 32 Support02:23:40.240 - 2:21:51 PM; Representative Terry Roy, representing Rockingham 32 and Chairman of the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, introduced a bill at the request of Director Skipper of the Law Enforcement Training. The bill aims to allow sworn officers working at the academy to take details under a mutual aid agreement, addressing the issue of pay cuts that deter experienced officers from teaching at the academy. Roy emphasized the straightforward nature of the bill and its importance in attracting the best and brightest to train new police recruits.
Unclear: John Skippa, Director of New Hampshire Police Standards and Training Support02:24:56.080 - 2:23:07 PM; John Skippa, Director of New Hampshire Police Standards and Training, along with Assistant Director O'Brien, testified in support of the bill. Skippa thanked Representative Roy for introducing the bill and explained its dual benefits: it would allow their agency to assist other law enforcement agencies during events and address staffing issues by enabling academy instructors to earn extra income through details. He highlighted the national staffing challenges in law enforcement and the need for the bill to help retain quality instructors at the academy.
Unclear: Unnamed Senator Information Only02:27:19.920 - 2:25:30 PM; An unnamed senator sought clarification on the role of law enforcement training specialists, confirming that they are both police officers and lead instructors at the New Hampshire Police Academy. The senator ensured that the bill does not apply to teaching assistants or those not fully qualified, but only to those in a teaching capacity.
Unclear: Unnamed Senator Information Only02:28:34.080 - 2:26:45 PM; Another unnamed senator, more familiar with facilities than personnel, inquired about the number of personnel at the facility and the goal of the bill. Director Skippa responded that there are 12 full-time police officers working as training specialists at the academy. He clarified that the bill would allow these officers to take details on an interim basis, such as weekends or evenings, without compromising their primary duties at the academy.
HB778 1382s: Regina Bertzel, State Senator for District 19, representing Derry, Hampstead, and Windham Information Only02:29:25.800 - 2:27:36 PM; Senator Bertzel introduced amendment 1382s to HB778, explaining that it corrects the language from 'mentally or physically incapacitated' to 'physically incapacitated' for the purpose of violent act disability retirement. She mentioned that this amendment was agreed upon with the prime sponsor and is intended to ensure that individuals who suffer from a violent act, such as being shot, are properly covered under the retirement system without affecting PTSD coverage under other statutes.
HB778 1382s: Unnamed Senator Information Only02:31:48.080 - 2:29:59 PM; The senator asked for clarification on why mental incapacitation due to trauma was being removed from the bill, expressing concern about the coverage for PTSD related to violent incidents. It was explained that PTSD is covered under workers' compensation and that the violent act disability retirement is specifically for physical incapacitation due to violent acts, not mental conditions like PTSD, which are handled differently.

Gannon, Bill(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Abbas, Daryl(V Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Altschiller, Debra(D)[CT]2024
McConkey, Mark(R)	Reardon, Tara(D)