Warning: Bill numbers and names are based on text-to-speech transcript which may have errors due to transcription issues or ad hoc/incomplete language use by committee.
relative to the statute of limitations for bringing a private right of action for violation of the statute prohibiting medical procedures and treatments intended to alter a minor's gender.
(New Title) holding state contracts with DEI provisions to be void as a matter of law and establishing a right of action for citizens where public entities or state agencies engage with contracts with DEI provisions.
(New Title) relative to the regulation and appeal of motor vehicle towing from public highways and prohibiting the division of motor vehicles from suspending a license on the basis of debt owed to a private entity related to the towing or storing of a motor vehicle.
Expresses concerns that the bill could inhibit domestic violence survivors from recording threats without notifying the perpetrator, which might alter the threat but not the danger; suggests holding for clarifying information.
HB1100
Information Only00:34:31.206 - 1:33:27 PM
Acknowledges the concern and decides to hold the bill until next Tuesday; withdraws the Ought to Pass motion.
HB1240
Vote00:34:31.206 - 1:33:27 PM
Moves for interim study on HB1240.
HB1240
Vote00:34:31.206 - 1:33:27 PM
Seconds the motion.
HB1240
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Calls for vote on interim study; motion passes. Moves consent calendar.
HB1240
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Moves consent.
HB1240
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Seconds the consent motion.
HB1240
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Calls for vote on consent; motion passes. Asks if Senator Avis wants to take it out.
HB1240
Information Only00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Agrees to take it out.
HB1356
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Moves Ought to Pass on HB1356.
HB1356
Vote00:35:51.390 - 1:34:47 PM
Seconds the motion.
HB1356
Oppose00:37:16.394 - 1:36:12 PM
Notes that the bill only applies moving forward, does not apply to anyone currently, and creates unnecessary confusion and bureaucracy.
HB1356
Vote00:37:16.394 - 1:36:12 PM
Calls for vote on Ought to Pass; motion passes. Asks if Senator Abbas wants to take it out.
HB1356
Information Only00:37:16.394 - 1:36:12 PM
Agrees to take it out.
HB1423
Vote00:37:16.394 - 1:36:12 PM
Moves Ought to Pass on HB1423.
HB1423
Vote00:37:16.394 - 1:36:12 PM
Seconds the motion.
HB1423
Support00:38:06.109 - 1:37:02 PM
Empathizes with sponsors' motivations and agrees with 99% of the bill, but objects to lines 23-25 introducing a mandatory minimum, suggesting it increases costs without improving safety; prefers raising the minimum fine instead.
HB1423
Support00:38:06.109 - 1:37:02 PM
Echoes concerns about the mandatory minimum.
HB1423
Oppose00:38:55.109 - 1:37:51 PM
Senator Reardon opposes the bill due to the mandatory minimum one-year jail term for each incident, which stacks consecutively and removes judicial discretion to consider circumstances, intent, and charging. While appreciating the sponsor's intent to criminalize the behavior, finds the penalties excessive.
HB1423
Information Only00:38:55.109 - 1:37:51 PM
The chair asks if the committee is open to amending out the mandatory minimum one-year imprisonment served consecutively and allowing judicial discretion in cases where imprisonment may be warranted.
HB1423
Support00:40:13.069 - 1:39:09 PM
Senator Abbas appreciates the discussion on mandatory minimums but prefers to leave them in, noting it as a hot topic between chambers.
HB1423
Support00:40:13.069 - 1:39:09 PM
Senator Gannon agrees with leaving the mandatory minimums in place.
HB1423
Vote00:40:13.069 - 1:39:09 PM
The committee votes on the ought to pass motion for HB1423. All in favor say aye (passes unanimously). Opposed: none. Senator Gannon takes the bill out.
HB1442 1357
Support00:41:37.429 - 1:40:33 PM
Senator Gannon offers Amendment 1357, which incorporates language from SB 552 by Senator Avard.
HB1442 1357
Oppose00:42:32.709 - 1:41:28 PM
Senator Altshuler objects to the amendment language, arguing it dials back human and civil rights, cannot allow carve-outs for discrimination, and represents a setback contrary to New Hampshire's history of defending rights.
HB1442 1357
Oppose00:42:32.709 - 1:41:28 PM
Senator Reardon agrees with Senator Altshuler and cites testimony from the public providing examples of why the bill's language is inaccurate.
HB1442 1357
Vote00:42:32.709 - 1:41:28 PM
The committee votes on Amendment 1357. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: no. Then votes on ought to pass as amended. All in favor say aye (passes 3-2). Opposed: no. Senator Abbas takes the bill out.
HB1444
Information Only00:44:05.692 - 1:43:01 PM
Senator Altshuler expresses concern that the prime sponsor and co-sponsors did not show up to support the bill, viewing it as a mark against its importance.
HB1444
Vote00:44:05.692 - 1:43:01 PM
The committee votes on the ought to pass motion for HB1444. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: none. Then moves to consent calendar. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: none. Senator Reardon moves consent. Senator Riordan takes the bill out.
HB1709
Information Only00:45:28.572 - 1:44:24 PM
Senator Altshuler questions the bill's application, recalling a complicated explanation from Senator Abbas about its narrow scope, limited to deported felons who return, obtain a lease, and are discovered.
HB1709
Support00:45:28.572 - 1:44:24 PM
Senator Abbas explains the bill's limited application to previously convicted and deported felons who re-enter, rent property in New Hampshire, and are discovered. Cites an example of a deported individual who repeatedly returned and murdered a Nashua resident, illustrating a compelling case for the bill.
HB1709
Oppose00:47:39.495 - 1:46:35 PM
Senator Reardon argues the bill is convoluted, misplaced in the Landlord-Tenant Statute (540-A), as felons who re-enter are already committing crimes warranting arrest via warrant. Adding eviction-related arrest provisions complicates landlord-tenant law unnecessarily.
HB1709
Vote00:45:28.572 - 1:44:24 PM
The committee votes on the ought to pass motion for HB1709. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: none. Senator Abbas takes the bill out.
HB1788
Vote00:48:51.295 - 1:47:47 PM
The committee votes on the interim study motion for HB1788. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: none. Then moves to consent calendar. All in favor say aye (passes). Opposed: none. Senator Reardon moves consent, Senator Abbas seconds. Senator Reardon takes the bill out.
HB1236
Information Only00:50:11.535 - 1:49:07 PM
Senator Reardon introduces an amendment to HB1236.
Unclear
Support00:52:33.085 - 1:51:29 PM
Joe Costanza testified in favor of the amendment authorizing body-worn cameras for county corrections officers under RSA 30B, aligned with RSA 105D standards for law enforcement. He highlighted the importance for community corrections programs like pre-trial services and substance misuse monitoring outside facilities. Inside facilities, body cams would supplement overhead cameras by providing audio and video for de-escalation, protecting staff from accusations and assaults, and expediting PREA investigations. He noted benefits seen in other jails and by police in communities, emphasizing training and policies to address privacy concerns like HIPAA in hospitals.
HB1003
Information Only00:58:25.988 - 1:57:21 PM
Representative Bob Linn introduced HB 1003 in place of Representative McFarland, explaining that the bill prohibits the Grafton County Attorney from private practice of law except for family members without conflicts. He shared his view as a former prosecutor that prosecutors should focus full-time on their role.
HB1576
Support01:01:53.382 - 2:00:49 PM
Representative Kathleen Puckett, as prime sponsor, explained that HB 1576 strengthens restitution management without changing amounts or creating new obligations. It introduces annual financial reviews of offenders to adjust payments based on ability, enhances enforcement tools like wage garnishment and liens when offenders can pay but don't, improves victim transparency with notifications on collections and delays, and ensures timely disbursement of funds. She cited issues with software causing delays in dispersing $3 million, emphasizing alignment with the Victims' Bill of Rights for over 13,000 victims.
HB1576
Support01:10:59.503 - 2:09:55 PM
Pamela Keilig and Meg Chant testified in strong support of HB 1576 as a common-sense update to statutes over 30 years old, upholding the Victims' Bill of Rights by ensuring notifications, accountability for offenders, and timely payments. They noted it aligns with best practices in states like Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Maine for enforcement. Emphasizing victim healing, they stressed that inadequate notifications and delayed payments re-victimize survivors and violate statutory rights under RSA 21-H:3, making the process integral to justice and rehabilitation.
HB1576
Support01:14:24.213 - 2:13:20 PM
Jessica Coran testified on behalf of the Department of Corrections, expressing support for HB1576 to enhance enforcement tools and resources for victim restitution. She highlighted that DOC manages 13,000 active restitution cases for 21,000 victims with only four collections officers, down from 11 a decade ago. She noted that 16% or more offenders (about 8,000) are noncompliant for 60 days or more, making monitoring and enforcement challenging without adequate staffing. Additional provisions require software upgrades, estimated to need vendor support with undetermined costs. DOC supports the bill to better serve victims.
HB1576
Support01:22:22.485 - 2:21:18 PM
Steven Endres, a criminal law attorney with over 25 years of experience, supported HB1576, viewing restitution as a mechanism to compensate victims without needing civil lawsuits. He noted that with 21,000 victims entitled to restitution, it reduces small claims and civil suits. He endorsed mirroring civil statutes for costs, interest, periodic payments, and property attachments, and keeping victims informed.
HB1576
Support01:24:15.706 - 2:23:11 PM
Meryl Beauchamp, with 18 years as a victim witness advocate, supported HB1576 for amending the restitution statute. She emphasized that victims suffer significant financial losses from crimes, and restitution provides accountability and healing. Victims' rights include timely restitution, but failures in collection re-traumatize them. Victims often contact her office frustrated by lack of payments or information. The bill ensures accountability, notification, and timely restitution to make victims whole.
HB1576
Support01:28:01.758 - 2:26:57 PM
Nicole Kippett, a 18-year victim advocate and crime survivor who received restitution, strongly supported HB1576. She explained restitution's restorative role, directly aiding victims who bear crime's financial burden, including medical bills and lost savings. Challenges include halted payments post-incarceration and minimal parole collections. She praised provisions for victim notifications, offender reporting of financial changes, and consistent collection to promote accountability, transparency, and trust in the justice system.
HB1130
Support01:31:58.258 - 2:30:54 PM
Bob Lynn supported HB1130, which enhances judicial performance evaluations since 2001 by adding in-court observations, expanding to part-time judges, senior active judges, and referees, shortening reevaluation to 12 months, and making results public with judge identities. House amendments removed public disclosure of survey comments to avoid bias and eliminated case processing statistics analysis per judiciary's request, as scheduling is clerk-controlled. Drafted with Chief Justice McDonald, the bill promotes accountability for lifetime-appointed judges without encouraging unwarranted recusals, given New Hampshire's high-caliber judiciary. Evaluations aim for self-improvement and public accountability.
HB1130
Information Only01:45:57.937 - 2:44:53 PM
Responded to questions about handling judicial behavior issues through appropriate interventions and potential disciplinary actions via the Judicial Conduct Committee if needed. Addressed concerns that HB 1130 might accelerate impeachment processes by making complaints public, stating it is possible but not the intent, and unlikely given the high quality of the judiciary.
HB1130
Support01:47:59.437 - 2:46:55 PM
Strongly supports HB 1130 for promoting transparency, accountability, and public trust in the judicial system. Evaluations assess impartiality, communication clarity, and temperament to identify training needs, not case outcomes. Draws on best practices including neutral courtroom observations. Notes that most people appear without lawyers, especially in domestic violence cases, and reports concerns about a small group of judges misapplying law or mistreating victims. Urges support to ensure a responsive justice system for crime victims.
HB1130
Information Only01:52:14.225 - 2:51:10 PM
Reviewed the House-passed amendment and requested an amendment to remove the phrase 'analyze the case processing statistics' on page one, line 29, as it was omitted after House Finance changes. Offered to answer questions on the fiscal note and noted judges present to speak individually.
HB1130
Oppose01:53:34.345 - 2:52:30 PM
Supports improving judicial evaluations and adding courtroom observations for professional growth and insight. Opposes public disclosure of evaluations due to risks to judicial impartiality and independence, potential pressure from public opinion, existing accountability mechanisms like appeals and the Judicial Conduct Committee, unreliable small sample sizes in evaluations (20-24 responses for thousands of cases), emotional nature of family cases leading to biased feedback, and safety concerns from increased visibility and threats. Suggests keeping individual evaluations confidential while making aggregate data public. Responded to questions affirming that judges take evaluations seriously for improvement, value constructive comments, and address performance issues ongoingly; noted delays are resource issues, not judge-specific, and complaints during cases should use established channels.
HB1130
Oppose02:04:22.385 - 3:03:18 PM
David King, a retired circuit court judge with 36 years of experience, opposes making judicial evaluations public, arguing it will not improve performance and will negatively impact the circuit court bench. He highlights that evaluations are already an important tool for supervisory judges to ensure quality, supplemented by ongoing feedback from attorneys and staff. King notes the heavy caseloads and low resources in circuit courts, low morale, and that the bill was drafted without circuit court input. He references ABA guidelines emphasizing confidentiality for self-improvement, not accountability, and shares historical context from legislative committees and expert opinions supporting privacy. Publicizing evaluations could increase recusals, chill feedback due to required signatures, reduce response rates, and create pressure on judges to avoid criticism, potentially swaying decisions contrary to judicial conduct rules. He suggests keeping evaluations confidential and possibly studying other improvements like court observations.
HB1130
Oppose02:20:25.475 - 3:19:21 PM
Susan Carbon, a retired circuit court judge from Chichester with 36 years of service, supports court observations for judges but opposes publicizing performance evaluations. She argues that anonymity allows useful, confidential feedback modeled on national best practices, and public release would create a chilling effect, deterring good candidates and causing experienced judges to leave. This would undermine judicial independence by inviting external influences, violating the Code of Judicial Conduct's prohibition on being swayed by public opinion or criticism. In high-stakes circuit court cases like abuse, neglect, and domestic violence, disgruntled litigants—often self-represented—would weaponize evaluations for retaliation, increasing threats and recusals. Carbon cites real threats to judges, including her own experiences, and notes existing accountability mechanisms like the Judicial Conduct Committee and appeals. Public rankings would erode collegiality and morale without enhancing performance, reducing evaluations to meaningless public shaming.
HB1130
Oppose02:29:23.762 - 3:28:19 PM
Jill O'Neill, Executive Director of the New Hampshire Lawyers Assistance Program, which supports lawyers and judges with well-being issues including monitoring for discipline, opposes publicizing judicial performance evaluations. She argues it would erode trust within the judiciary, making leaders hesitant to seek help due to fears of reflected issues in reviews. Concerns include heightened safety risks, increased recusals and appeals, especially with 85% self-represented litigants, and existing transparency mechanisms. O'Neill references emerging research like the Judicial Well-Being Survey showing added pressures from caseloads. While agreeing on the evaluations' comprehensive nature, she believes the risks outweigh benefits, potentially causing more harm than good in pursuing transparency and accountability.
HB1130
Support02:32:41.500 - 3:31:37 PM
David Albrecht from Nashua supports HB 1130, though he feels it does not go far enough in addressing judiciary self-policing issues. He shares personal experiences with three judges in his case who faced discipline: Judge Paul S. Moore (criminally convicted and disbarred for ballot stuffing on evaluations), Judge Julie Intracaso (conflict of interest), and Marital Master Bruce Delpra (removed from bench). Albrecht echoes earlier support for public evaluations, citing high-profile domestic violence cases like the Lindsay Smith shooting where victims criticized judges publicly. He advocates holding Supreme Court justices to the same standards, referencing issues with retired Justice Marconi and calls for investigation into Chief Justice McDonald. He reads a 2018 email from Judge King acknowledging sensitivity around evaluations and potential conflicts, urging support for transparency under Article 8 to improve accountability.
The bill sponsor introduces HB 1457 to authorize natural organic reduction (NOR), an environmentally friendly alternative to burial and cremation that composts human remains accelerated in an above-ground container with organic matter like straw. She notes conventional burials consume scarce urban land with concrete vaults, while cremation uses fossil fuels and pollutes air; NOR produces beneficial remains for planting trees or conservation projects, unlike alkaline cremation ashes. Introduced two years ago due to interest in natural burial, the bill addresses space limits, family mobility reducing grave visits, and cremation's popularity for affordability and ephemerality. Modeled after cremation statutes, it outlines licensing, oversight by the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification, record-keeping, and rules for health and sanitation based on 14 states' experiences, including New England neighbors. An amendment by Senator Reardon refines details for workability. Existing funeral homes could offer NOR; it's enabling legislation for options without mandating, preventing out-of-state travel, emphasizing Granite Staters' right to 21st-century choices.
Bob Dunn, representing Bishop Peter Libasci, opposes HB 1457 on behalf of the Roman Catholic Diocese, emphasizing the inherent dignity of the human person underlying state laws on remains disposal, which entitle bodies to respect reflecting life's dignity. While not imposing Catholic teachings on the state, he argues NOR, particularly human composting, treats remains utilitarianism, inconsistent with human dignity. He urges consideration of this principle alongside practical bill aspects, noting impacts on views of living persons.
HB1457 Senator Reardon's amendment
Oppose02:47:46.198 - 3:46:42 PM
Dunn continues his testimony emphasizing the need to promote human dignity and avoid utilitarian treatment of human remains. He references a similar bill, Senate Bill 53, sent to interim study. During Q&A, he argues that not all individual choices align with human dignity and the common good, supports cremation and green burials but opposes natural organic reduction due to its process producing a large volume of material unlike cremains. He notes historical practices and differences in the resulting materials.
HB1457 Senator Reardon's amendment
Support02:53:00.089 - 3:51:56 PM
Bluch provides brief support for the legislation, noting it was developed thoughtfully with input from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES), incorporating their feedback. He mentions a comprehensive report based on OPLC suggestions to conform with state law. He highlights that 80% of burials in NH are cremations and this process patterns existing practices. As a devout Catholic, he acknowledges concerns but emphasizes the science, safety, and clean nature of the process.
HB1457 Senator Reardon's amendment
Support02:55:08.176 - 3:54:04 PM
Moore testifies in favor of the bill with an amendment proposed by his association. They reviewed the bill line by line, correcting errors such as removing specific fee amounts, license durations, and inspection frequencies from statute to allow flexibility via rulemaking. They avoided referencing cremation in the bill and expanded rulemaking provisions. He points out that the bill's language on reduced remains (from cremation statutes) may not fit, as natural organic reduction produces bone fragments and composted material separately, with only bones returned like cremains. He stresses the need for licensed NH funeral homes to handle public services and notes that out-of-state shipping increases costs and environmental concerns. During Q&A, he explains they developed their own amendments independently but offered to collaborate.
HB1457 Senator Reardon's amendment
Support03:02:05.295 - 4:01:01 PM
Rep. Breckenham offers remarks in support, clarifying that the bill does not undermine other disposition methods like cremation, which share similar processes (e.g., removing foreign items, pulverizing bones). She emphasizes that professionals in natural organic reduction are deeply invested in death care and treat remains respectfully. Many choose this method for personal connection to land, especially in NH where people value returning to their property.
HB1457 Senator Reardon's amendment
Information Only03:03:45.055 - 4:02:41 PM
Juris provides neutral testimony on technical aspects, noting Senator Riordan's amendment addresses operational issues to make the bill workable. The original draft had conflicts with existing statutes, making it inoperable. Her recommendations are technical, not policy-related. She requests extending the effective date to allow time for rulemaking, as implementation would proceed under statute if rules are delayed, and this novel concept requires about a year for rules. The office takes no position on policy but ensures operability.
HB1492
Support03:07:59.155 - 4:06:55 PM
Peter Leishman, the prime sponsor, explained that HB1492 originated from concerns over exorbitant towing bills, such as a $23,000 charge for towing a damaged concrete truck from Bedford to Milford. He highlighted five changes in the bill, including requiring tow operators to inform customers of their right to appeal excessive bills to the Department of Safety within 15 days, but noting the unfairness of requiring payment first. The Transportation Committee added provisions addressing license suspensions for unpaid bills and making towing rates publicly available. The bill passed the House with strong support after amendments.
HB1492
Oppose03:10:46.795 - 4:09:42 PM
Matt Amatucci expressed concerns that the bill's provisions on license suspensions for unpaid towing fees could deter tow companies from accepting tows, especially for abandoned or poor-condition vehicles, as they would bear towing and disposal costs without recovery mechanisms. He provided statistics: 177 hearings in 2025, 118 in 2024, and 167 in 2023 out of about 6,000 tows. He noted that suspensions remain until fees are paid and that eliminating this could hinder law enforcement's ability to clear roads quickly, citing examples like declined tows at rest areas leading to traffic backups and strained resources. During Q&A, he discussed the appeals process for unreasonable fees, comparisons used in hearings, confidentiality of fee schedules to prevent rate hikes, and how tow companies are selected based on need and geography.
HB1492
Support03:23:04.641 - 4:22:00 PM
Henry Gaussen supported the bill, noting that low appeal numbers (around 380 over three years out of 6,000 tows) indicate lack of awareness rather than absence of issues. He explained that discovering the confidentiality of fee schedules prompted amendments for transparency, as the legislature funds these services. He strongly favored removing license suspensions for private tow companies, arguing it creates criminals from those unable to afford bills, and suggested addressing abandoned vehicles and commercial non-payment through other means like business penalties.
HB1492
Support03:25:49.683 - 4:24:45 PM
Seth Miller, involved in the Transportation Committee's amendments, supported the bill as his 'baby.' He emphasized that license suspension is disproportionately punitive, removing people from the workforce and society, especially in car-dependent New Hampshire. He noted fewer than 100 suspensions annually, with some lasting years due to unawareness, and that it doesn't absolve debt. During Q&A, he clarified appeal numbers, the punitive nature, New Hampshire's uniqueness in this practice, and the bill's evolution from state-set rates to transparency and fair appeals without prior payment. He advocated for fair negotiations and partial debt recovery via vehicle sales.
HB1492
Support03:33:01.145 - 4:31:57 PM
Jonah O'Ryan Wheeler supported the bill, praising the prime sponsor's stakeholder engagement. He likened high towing charges (e.g., $30 for a shovel) to extortion, noting lack of choice in tows decided by police, even if inconvenient. Sharing a personal $1,200 bill for a short tow, he highlighted unawareness or inability to appeal, low appeal stats, and New Hampshire's unique license suspensions harming employment and mobility. He viewed the bill's transparency as a positive step. During Q&A, he deferred on specifics like retroactive reinstatement of suspended licenses.
HB1492
Support03:38:15.900 - 4:37:11 PM
Bob Scully represented 300 trucking companies and supported amendments extending appeals to 30 days, requiring invoice notices of appeal rights, and allowing appeals without prior payment. He noted low appeals due to unawareness and explained tow selection as sequential by state police without rate consideration. He shared examples of varying high bills from the same company and the burden on industry to prove excessiveness. The license revocation united support for the bill's 256-84 House passage. He urged passing the entire bill, warning that removing parts could kill it in the House.
HB1492
Support03:42:21.401 - 4:41:17 PM
Carmine Sarno spoke in favor of HB1492, emphasizing the need for a framework of transparency in towing practices. He highlighted the importance of notification and a redress process for disputing unfair towing bills, noting that many, including small businesses like his, may not be aware of such options without advocacy from groups like the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association.
HB1492
Support03:43:07.572 - 4:42:03 PM
Adam Sheppard, on behalf of M&S Logistics, supported HB1492 for its transparency measures. He discussed issues with current billing practices, including excessive markups on consumables, PPE, and untethered administrative fees of 5% on already inflated charges. He stressed the lack of posted schedules for fees and the critical need for appeal language on invoices, as many are unaware of appeal options without external advocacy. During questioning, he clarified that administrative fees do not scale reasonably with work scope and noted markups on items like shovels that were not even retained.
HB1492
Oppose03:45:57.299 - 4:44:53 PM
Devin Karkos opposed HB1492, explaining that towing companies must accept all police calls, including undesirable ones that may result in financial loss, such as abandoned vehicles from accidents, arrests, or roadside abandonments. He noted that New Hampshire lacks insurance requirements unlike other states, making collection difficult. He defended the current tool of administrative hearings through the Department of Safety for suspending driving privileges as a last resort after failed payment arrangements, which helps collect payments and supports operations including nights, weekends, and holidays. He urged retaining state support for small companies to keep roads clear. During questioning, he confirmed that companies voluntarily join police rotation lists, accepting the risks.
HB1492
Oppose03:50:43.963 - 4:49:39 PM
Jim Bailey, owner of a family-run towing business in Merrimack for 45 years, opposed changes in HB1492 that would remove the current safety net for towing companies. He described how they enforce laws by handling tows from traffic stops, DWIs, or violations, often with no owner communication. He shared an example of a vehicle towed three years ago where the owner only contacted him after issues registering in Florida, highlighting the leverage provided by the system. He advocated keeping this tool as it works most of the time and closed with an analogy from his niece about not enabling littering by always cleaning up, paralleling the need for accountability in towing payments.
HB1492
Support03:52:26.799 - 4:51:22 PM
Mike Gilboa explains the challenges tow companies face in getting paid for services, especially with abandoned vehicles lacking insurance. He highlights that while emergency responders are automatically compensated, tow companies must rely on vehicle owners' insurance, which is often canceled. He supports the ability to pull licenses and registrations as a tool to encourage responsibility, noting he has dealt with 18 abandoned cars this year without pulling any licenses by negotiating instead. He emphasizes the safety hazards of abandoned vehicles, such as leaking fluids, and the importance of clearing roads to prevent accidents involving emergency vehicles. During Q&A, he confirms the effectiveness of the license pull threat in negotiations and has no objection to publishing fee schedules, though notes time constraints during emergencies prevent fee review on-site.
HB1492
Information Only04:01:49.187 - 5:00:45 PM
Scott Reed clarifies the distinction between routine tows and major incidents involving commercial vehicles, like tractor-trailers causing highway closures, which incur high costs including cleanup. He discusses issues with unlicensed, uninsured, or improperly equipped out-of-state drivers contributing to these incidents. On the light-duty side, he notes many unpaid tows involve unlicensed drivers linked to drug issues, and his company prefers negotiation over license revocation. He compares practices in New Hampshire and Vermont, noting Vermont's stricter insurance enforcement reduces problems. During Q&A, he states no objection to making the towing list and fees public, acknowledging the urgency of accident response prevents on-site negotiations.
HB1492
Support04:05:55.480 - 5:04:51 PM
Jay O'Leary expresses full support for transparency in towing fees as proposed, but opposes inserting the requirement into RSA 262, which could criminalize non-compliance as a misdemeanor or felony. He recommends handling it through administrative rules (Saf-C 9400) to make it a compliance issue rather than criminal. He argues that tow companies already absorb upfront costs and potential losses from abandoned vehicles, and removing tools like license suspension would force rate increases to subsidize losses. He notes that states like Massachusetts avoid these issues through mandatory insurance covering tows. During Q&A, he defers on whether members would support public disclosure of the list and fees without consulting them.
HB1492
Oppose04:10:00.979 - 5:08:56 PM
Roy Schweiker criticizes aspects of HB1492, arguing it requires payment before appealing tow bills, which could prevent appeals for high costs. He suggests allowing appeals before payment to avoid vehicle seizure. On personal items in towed vehicles, he opposes holding non-owner items hostage to the tow bill or disposing of them after 30 days, recommending return to owners instead, especially in cases like fatalities. He supports suspending vehicle registrations but opposes driver's license suspension, as it punishes non-drivers (e.g., theft victims). He advocates for reforming the towing list to include more competitive bidders within 20% of the lowest, allow cheaper applicants, and give police discretion to call the nearest company rather than strictly rotating the list.
HB1492
Support04:15:20.390 - 5:14:16 PM
Ralph Kress clarifies that CDL licenses are not pulled, as they typically involve company-owned vehicles. He notes the state police towing list has shrunk from about 80 to 50 companies in recent years. He supports extending the hold period for vehicles from 15 to 30 days for hearings and is open to a committee or study for common ground solutions. The testimony cuts off, but he addresses suspension and other points in favor of the industry's position.
HB1633
Support04:33:07.148 - 5:32:03 PM
Erica Leon introduced HB 1633, emphasizing that it clarifies existing laws under RSA 21-M:19 ensuring sexual assault victims are not charged fees for evidence collection kits. She shared a story of a woman denied a rape kit despite knowing her rights after being drugged and groped, highlighting the disconnect between law and practice. Leon discussed fiscal costs of kits ($46 each) and toxicology tests ($500 each), totaling around $1,000 per case, and criticized outdated DOJ materials that fail to convey urgency, such as the five-day window for evidence collection versus actual timelines (24 hours for blood, 120 for urine). She advocated for revamped notifications urging immediate hospital visits, better doctor guides, and noted the fiscal note's assumption of 1,000 additional kits annually indicates current denials. Sharing her personal experience of being drugged and raped in college, she argued the societal costs of unaddressed trauma far exceed kit expenses, urging passage to empower survivors.
HB1633
Support04:43:56.412 - 5:42:52 PM
Representative Wheeler praised Representative Leon's testimony and supported HB 1633 for ensuring sexual assault survivors are informed of their rights to seek justice. He noted the bill's broad definition of survivor and its unanimous passage in House committees and near-unanimous floor votes, reflecting bipartisan consensus. Wheeler emphasized that survivors deserve clear information on available legal avenues during their worst moments, committing to refine the bill text for Senate passage.
HB1633
Support04:47:21.756 - 5:46:17 PM
Representative Potenza refuted the DOJ's $1 million fiscal note, arguing it inflates costs by assuming toxicology tests for all 1,000 additional cases, whereas testing is only needed for suspected drug-facilitated assaults. She highlighted the DOJ's admission of 1,000 annual denials as evidence of the problem, criticizing circular logic in claiming no issue due to underreporting. Potenza clarified the bill enforces existing RSA 21-M rights without overriding medical discretion, promotes transparency via DOJ postings on timelines, and addresses New Hampshire's imbalanced justice system favoring drug prosecutions over sexual assaults. She noted strong House support (Criminal Justice 12-0, Finance 24-1, full House 341 votes) and suggested minor bill fixes.
HB1633
Support04:55:32.008 - 5:54:28 PM
Representative Geisen expressed surprise at notification issues and supported HB 1633 based on his 24-year military career as a sexual harassment prevention officer and victim advocate. He stressed the military's practice of immediately informing victims of rights, resources, and options for justice or privacy to aid recovery. Geisen argued that failing to provide this information risks higher rates of chemical dependency, alcoholism, and suicide among survivors, emphasizing the need to front-load resources for healing and preventing long-term societal costs, regardless of evidence maintenance expenses.
HB1633
Support04:59:10.469 - 5:58:06 PM
Jade, a survivor of sexual assault starting at age six, urged passage of HB 1633, explaining trauma's shock and fight-or-flight response impairs decision-making, especially with trusted perpetrators. She criticized medical providers' discretion in evidence collection, advocating that victims receive all options at hospitals to seek justice. Jade questioned resistance to providing rights information, linking uninformed survivors to lifelong trauma, complex PTSD, suicidal ideation, and self-blame, arguing rights are meaningless if unknown and that simple notification could prevent misery.
HB1633
Support05:03:30.222 - 6:02:26 PM
Esther Claudette advocated for HB 1633, noting it requires covered providers to give survivors a card listing existing rights under New Hampshire law, such as free forensic evidence collection and medical exams. She argued secret rights are undelivered promises, akin to Miranda rights read to arrestees for functionality. Esther shared that peers, teachers, and survivors assume such notification is already law, finding it absurd otherwise, and urged passage as basic respect to ensure survivors can exercise entitlements.
HB1633
Support05:07:34.442 - 6:06:30 PM
Stacey Brown testified in strong support of HB 1633, sharing her personal experience of being assaulted at a party when she was under 21, where she passed out from alcohol and woke up during the assault. She felt ashamed and was disbelieved by friends, and noted that the Survivors' Bill of Rights would have informed her of her right to an evidence collection kit, which could have provided proof. As a counselor, she has heard many stories of victims being denied support, and emphasized that the bill empowers survivors by requiring clear, written notice of their existing rights, such as forensic evidence and protections. She highlighted that the bill is a simple step to inform survivors, noted that opposing organizations are now neutral, and urged passage given the overwhelming House support of 340-1.
HB1633
Support05:10:33.957 - 6:09:29 PM
Senator Dana Albrecht expressed strong support for HB 1633, agreeing that rape and attempted rape are serious crimes that should be prosecuted. She compared the situation to Miranda rights, which have been read to defendants since 1966 to inform them of due process rights like remaining silent and having an attorney. She questioned why victims of rape in 2026 are not informed of their rights when seeking a rape kit at a hospital, emphasizing the need for simplified information about the law. Referencing a senator's mention of his daughter, she stated that no one suggests DIY evidence collection but simply wants victims, including her own daughters, to know their statutory rights. She dismissed opposition as misleading, noted the bill's 340-1 House passage, and characterized the core issue as ensuring victims know the law to enable prosecution.
HB1633
Support05:13:36.199 - 6:12:32 PM
Francesca, a survivor of multiple sexual assaults, supported HB 1633 by drawing a parallel to Miranda rights, which are read to accused individuals despite existing in the Constitution, because unknown rights cannot be exercised. She argued that the bill extends this courtesy to victims by requiring providers to hand survivors a card outlining their existing rights under the Survivors' Bill of Rights, including forensic evidence collection, medical examination, and information on options. She criticized the current system where rights on paper do not reach those they protect without prior knowledge, leading to unequal access based on social capital. Francesca highlighted statistics: sexual assault is the most underreported and underprosecuted violent crime, with only 25 of 1,000 perpetrators imprisoned, costing over $122,000 per survivor in health care, lost wages, and trauma. She noted that better evidence collection strengthens prosecutions, identifies serial offenders, reduces repeat harm, and that providing a card is a minimal barrier with immense benefits, urging the committee to pass the bill so survivors know what the law entitles them to.
HB1633
Oppose05:15:59.838 - 6:14:55 PM
Linda Rl, accompanied by Senior Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Strunzen, stated that the Attorney General's Office is not in support of HB 1633 in its current form due to concerns about its wording not reflecting the sponsor's intent. She explained that the bill's language, including references to elements of a sexual assault evidence collection kit, suggests victims could control the kit's medical components, contrary to national best practices. In preparing the fiscal note, they anticipated potential issues, noting that 83% of New Hampshire's sexual assault kits contain urine or blood samples. She argued that allowing victims to dictate kit contents, such as demanding a urine sample, would not serve justice or benefit victims.
HB1633
Information Only05:18:29.460 - 6:17:25 PM
Explains that samples collected outside the appropriate time window will not be analyzed by the New Hampshire forensic laboratory, giving victims a false sense of security. Describes the kit's two forms: medical examination encouraged for all, and evidence collection determined by trained medical professionals. Supports victims' rights but expresses concerns about kit elements and offers to answer questions.
HB1633
Oppose05:19:19.740 - 6:18:15 PM
Dispels the Miranda analogy, noting it applies only in custodial interrogation. Raises three legal issues: victims obtaining their own tests could lead to chain of custody problems, potential deposition of victim and lab experts, delays, and admissibility concerns; the bill's definition of 'sexual assault survivor' as one who 'asserts' they were assaulted excludes infants, children, or nonverbal individuals; unclear requirements for notifying about evidence collection for out-of-state assaults, as NH law enforcement lacks jurisdiction. Emphasizes involving professionals in protocol changes to avoid unintended consequences.
HB1633
Oppose05:36:55.549 - 6:35:51 PM
Opposes the bill as drafted due to unintended consequences from narrowing the definition of sexual assault survivors under the Crime Victim Bill of Rights, which could confuse medical providers in emergency rooms about statutory interpretation. Supports increased notification of victims' rights but opposes the narrowing definition.
HB1633
Oppose05:37:53.789 - 6:36:49 PM
Supports notification of rights but opposes requirements allowing kits or parts outside medically or forensically necessary time frames, as the priority is medical care including injury treatment, STI testing, prophylaxis, and referrals. Notes patients can choose full or partial kits if eligible; documentation and photos from SANEs provide evidence even without DNA or drug samples. Emphasizes kits follow state protocols based on science and best practices to benefit survivors most, avoiding unnecessary invasive 3-4 hour exams when no forensic benefit is expected.
HB1633
Support05:42:05.589 - 6:41:01 PM
Defends the bill, clarifying it does not relate to banned over-the-counter rape kits. Argues denying 3/4 of victims evidence collection is wrong, as future technologies may use it; doctors are trained collectors but not lawyers, so they shouldn't interpret complex AG documents in emergencies. Addresses fiscal note errors causing confusion; supports spending $1 million if it convicts more rapists. Notes late-raised definition concerns could be fixed; urges immediate hospital visits for evidence collection and criticizes DOJ website for not emphasizing urgency. Offers to assist with technical fixes, prioritizing victim help over minor issues.
HB1633
Information Only05:51:41.160 - 6:50:37 PM
Offers availability to clarify procedures at her institution, where she has worked since 2004 and performed over 100 forensic exams. Describes process: triage nurse alerts team and advocate upon identifying sexual assault victim; no Bill of Rights handed at triage; in private room, story is heard, needs assessed, and forensic/medical options provided regardless of timeline, focusing on listening, documenting, and care.