Committee Summary for House Judiciary (01/21/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1694 00:01:38.319 - 8:00:34 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the regulation of and protections for personal data obtained by websites and data brokers.	Wade, Alice(D)[F]2025
HB1694 00:24:17.199 - 8:23:13 AM	Executive Session	relative to the regulation of and protections for personal data obtained by websites and data brokers.	Wade, Alice(D)[F]2025
Unclear -	Public Hearing	Unclear
HB1746 00:30:48.800 - 8:29:44 AM	Public Hearing	subjecting taxpayer funded investigations to the right-to-know law.	Sabourin dit Choinière, Matt(R)[A-]2025
HB1746 01:39:28.000 - 9:38:24 AM	Executive Session	subjecting taxpayer funded investigations to the right-to-know law.	Sabourin dit Choinière, Matt(R)[A-]2025
CACR13 01:42:50.640 - 9:41:46 AM	Public Hearing	relating to registers of probate. Providing that the office of register of probate and all references to such office be eliminated.	Mannion, Dennis(R)[B+]2025
CACR13 01:54:14.960 - 9:53:10 AM	Executive Session	relating to registers of probate. Providing that the office of register of probate and all references to such office be eliminated.	Mannion, Dennis(R)[B+]2025
CACR25 01:57:32.960 - 9:56:28 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the right to marry. Providing that the right to marry is a fundamental civil right and that the state shall protect the right of every individual, regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race, to marry and to have their marriage legally recognized.	Wade, Alice(D)[F]2025
HB1032 03:16:14.000 - 11:15:10 AM	Public Hearing	creating an exception to physical attendance and quorum requirements under the right-to-know law for individuals with disabilities and individuals caring for a household member with disabilities.	Horrigan, Timothy(D)[F]2025
HB1040 03:40:17.200 - 11:39:13 AM	Public Hearing	establishing a committee to study the laws and procedures governing the filing and registering of quitclaim deeds in the state.	Turer, Eric(D)[F]2025
HB1040 04:05:02.718 - 12:03:58 PM	Executive Session	establishing a committee to study the laws and procedures governing the filing and registering of quitclaim deeds in the state.	Turer, Eric(D)[F]2025
HB1115 2026-019 04:07:30.160 - 12:06:26 PM	Public Hearing	adding a definition of citizen of New Hampshire.	McFarlane, Donald(R)[A]2025
HB1156 04:33:22.558 - 12:32:18 PM	Public Hearing	requiring that probate court notices of acquisitions of real estate through inheritance or similar devise be recorded in a county's registry of deeds.	Walker, David(R)[B+]2025
HB1156 04:58:12.400 - 12:57:08 PM	Executive Session	requiring that probate court notices of acquisitions of real estate through inheritance or similar devise be recorded in a county's registry of deeds.	Walker, David(R)[B+]2025
HB1333 04:59:37.680 - 12:58:33 PM	Executive Session	relative to nonconsensual provision of medication intended to terminate a pregnancy and the homicide of a fetus.	Aures, Cyril(R)[B+]2025
HB1436 05:01:58.480 - 1:00:54 PM	Executive Session	relative to the classification and protection of personal digital information and cloud-stored files.	Spillane, James(R)[A]2025

HB1694: Representative Alice Wade, Dover Support00:01:38.319 - 8:00:34 AM; Representative Wade introduced HB 1694, a data privacy bill modeled on Texas's data broker act. She explained how data brokers collect and sell personal information without consent, building detailed profiles for marketing or harmful purposes like stalking. The bill requires data brokers operating in New Hampshire to register annually, disclose practices, maintain cybersecurity standards, and respond to resident requests via a state online portal for access, deletion, or opt-out. She acknowledged the high fiscal note but offered to amend to reduce costs while keeping the registry. She emphasized privacy as a right and urged support.
HB1694: Zachary Taylor, Consumer Data Industry Association Oppose00:13:38.239 - 8:12:34 AM; Zachary Taylor testified on behalf of the Consumer Data Industry Association, representing credit bureaus and related businesses. He opposed HB 1694, arguing its core provisions duplicate New Hampshire's comprehensive data privacy statute, which focuses on activities rather than business models. The bill's definition exempts most data collectors with direct consumer connections, making registration arbitrary and incomplete. The proposed portal, inspired by California's costly Delete Act, would not effectively help consumers and could create confusion with existing exemptions like the Fair Credit Reporting Act. He urged finding the bill inexpedient to legislate and allowing the new privacy law to take effect.
HB1694: William China Martinez, State Privacy and Security Coalition Oppose00:17:14.880 - 8:16:10 AM; William China Martinez, associate attorney with Mariner Strategies, testified for the State Privacy and Security Coalition, a group involved in New Hampshire's privacy law passage. The coalition took no position on registration but opposed the bill for altering the comprehensive privacy law by allowing opt-out of personal data processing for any purpose. This would disrupt essential functions like fraud prevention and account services, undermining opt-in protections for sensitive data. Examples included suspicious login alerts and online order fulfillment, which require processing but could be unclear under the bill. He urged not advancing the bill in its current form.
HB1694: DJ Burke, Business and Industry Association Information Only00:21:22.880 - 8:20:18 AM; DJ Burke testified on behalf of the Business and Industry Association, New Hampshire's Chamber of Commerce and Manufacturing Association. The BIA had no official position due to its deliberative process but supported the recently enacted comprehensive privacy bill. He urged caution in amending it soon after adoption, noting the delicate balance achieved for consumer protection and business interests. No other states with similar laws have adopted provisions like those in HB 1694.
HB1694: Representative Alexander Oppose00:24:17.199 - 8:23:13 AM; In the executive session, Representative Alexander moved to find HB 1694 Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL). He expressed concerns about enforcement against out-of-state or foreign companies like those in China or TikTok, and noted recent passage of reasonable data privacy protections. He recommended waiting to evaluate how those laws work before advancing another bill.
HB1694: Committee Vote Vote00:25:18.719 - 8:24:14 AM; The committee discussed focusing on policy over costs, deferring fiscal concerns to the Finance Committee. Representative Alexander's motion for ITL was seconded, and after brief discussion, the roll call resulted in a unanimous 15-0 vote in favor of ITL.
HB1746: Representative Subi Support00:30:48.800 - 8:29:44 AM; Representative Subi introduces HB 1746, explaining that it would subject taxpayer-funded investigations conducted by or commissioned by public bodies to the Right to Know Law (RSA 91-A). She emphasizes that since these investigations are funded by taxpayers, their minutes and records, once completed, should belong to the public. This aligns with New Hampshire's tradition of open government as per Article 8 of the state constitution. She introduces Carla Garrick, president of Right to Know New Hampshire, for further illustration.
HB1746: Carla Garrick, President of Right to Know New Hampshire Support00:32:25.679 - 8:31:21 AM; Carla Garrick strongly supports HB 1746, highlighting its alignment with Article 8 of the New Hampshire Constitution, which mandates open, accessible, accountable, and responsive government. She explains that the bill targets taxpayer-funded investigations, requiring disclosure of records, reports, and materials with narrow redactions only for legally required privacy protections like HIPAA or statutory privileges. Findings, conclusions, recommendations, and factual summaries cannot be entirely withheld on privacy grounds, and public officials acting officially have no personal privacy shield. Garrick argues that secrecy erodes trust and that this bill closes loopholes allowing misconduct probes, hiring reviews, and audits to remain hidden, fostering suspicion and distrust. She references her past involvement in landmark First Amendment cases and the overturned Fennimore case, which affirmed public interest in disclosing misconduct investigations, especially for police personnel files. The bill codifies a balancing act prioritizing public interest over private interests in such cases to ensure transparency and accountability.
HB1746: Representative McFarland Information Only00:36:15.440 - 8:35:11 AM; Representative McFarland asks the sponsor about the fiscal note attached to the bill, inquiring to what extent they concur with it and what the fiscal impact might be if passed. The sponsor concurs that the fiscal note makes sense. McFarland then raises concerns using the example of federal security clearance investigations, questioning if releasing highly personal details from such probes would be excessive and where the line should be drawn.
HB1746: Carla Garrick (response to McFarland) Support00:37:12.080 - 8:36:08 AM; In response to Representative McFarland's question on the fiscal note, Garrick agrees it makes sense. Regarding the security clearance example, she dismisses its relevance, noting the bill addresses state-level public investigations, not federal ones. She explains the bill originated from press concerns and the overturned Fennimore Supreme Court case, which took 30 years to reverse a blanket exemption for police personnel files in misconduct cases. The case emphasized a balancing act favoring public interest disclosure. Garrick argues that for taxpayer-funded investigations, especially misconduct probes, the public has a constitutional right to full outcomes, not just summaries, to prevent issues like rehiring of problematic employees and to prioritize public interest over secrecy.
HB1746: Representative Smith Information Only00:40:18.560 - 8:39:14 AM; Representative Smith asks if the bill was influenced by circumstances in the city of Rochester, specifically an investigation involving the superintendent that cost significant public funds but remains private. The sponsor clarifies it is a principles-based bill, not tied to any specific incident.
HB1746: Kate Han, New Hampshire Association of Counties Oppose00:42:05.679 - 8:41:01 AM; Kate Han testified on behalf of the New Hampshire Association of Counties, expressing concerns that the bill is overly broad and would lead to significant increases in county budgets due to handling requests, redactions, and reviews. She highlighted that counties conduct various investigations, including those by sheriff's offices and personnel matters, and emphasized the fiscal impact on county taxpayers. She suggested the bill could be tightened to balance transparency with costs.
HB1746: Jeff Sten, Senior Assistant Attorney General, NH Department of Justice Oppose00:44:50.560 - 8:43:46 AM; Jeff Sten, a prosecutor at the New Hampshire Attorney General's Office, opposed the bill, arguing that it would eliminate confidentiality crucial for law enforcement success in solving crimes. He explained that confidentiality ensures witness reliability, protects witnesses from harm, allows investigative follow-up, prevents suspects from countering tactics, enables testing, avoids evidence tampering, safeguards innocent people's rights, and ensures fair trials through measures like witness sequestration. He clarified that the bill applies to investigations at any stage, not just completed ones, and extends to ongoing cases and trials, broadly undermining law enforcement effectiveness.
HB1746: JD Lavali, Senior Assistant Attorney General, NH Department of Justice Oppose00:48:03.440 - 8:46:59 AM; JD Lavali, chief of the Department of Justice client counseling unit, opposed the bill for noncriminal governmental investigations, such as administrative probes into licenses, public officials, employees, or agency operations. He argued that removing confidentiality would undermine investigative integrity by allowing collusion, evidence destruction, premature disclosures eroding confidence, and failing to protect privacy in cases like workplace misconduct. He cited New Hampshire Supreme Court recognition of public benefits in non-disclosure, which encourages whistleblowers and preserves privileges like deliberative process and attorney-client. The bill's broad scope could drain resources through increased 91-A requests and litigation, subjecting investigations to political pressure and misinformation.
HB1746: Chris Bond, Associate Attorney General, NH Department of Justice Oppose00:51:24.320 - 8:50:20 AM; Chris Bond, general counsel for the Department of Justice, reiterated opposition to the bill, noting it lacks a completion requirement for investigations, making real-time disclosures during ongoing probes difficult and harmful. Even if limited to closed investigations, it removes most exemptions in RSA 91-A:5, including those protecting legitimate privacy interests beyond just FERPA and HIPAA. He emphasized that investigations often reveal private conduct unrelated to duties, which would become public without protections. He supported current law's balance, where closed investigations are subject to Right-to-Know with redactions, and challenges can be litigated in court.
HB1746: Ann Marie Banfield, Parental Rights Advocate Support01:15:48.960 - 9:14:44 AM; Ann Marie Banfield, a parental rights advocate focused on education, supported the bill, assuming it applies post-investigation based on the language. She shared experiences filing 91-A requests for school-related investigations, often receiving redacted information. She explained that without access to investigation outcomes, she repeatedly requests new probes when violations are suspected, driving up costs unnecessarily. She advocated for knowing results to confirm or rule out law violations, reducing redundant investigations, especially in schools where teachers may unknowingly act outside the law. She supported privacy for students but emphasized the need for transparency on outcomes.
HB1746: Major Bill Brightite, New Hampshire State Police Oppose01:19:37.040 - 9:18:33 AM; Major Bill Brightite, overseeing the Investigative Services Bureau of the New Hampshire State Police, opposed HB 1746, arguing it overlooks public safety, investigative integrity, and disclosure timing. Premature releases could lead to inaccurate public conclusions, suspects evading accountability, evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and tainted juries. He noted the bill ignores New Hampshire Supreme Court precedents balancing transparency with these factors and contradicts federal FOIA case law by denying public officials any privacy rights. He highlighted the fiscal burden, as the State Police handle over 1,000 growing Right-to-Know requests annually, diverting resources from core duties like crime investigation and patrolling.
HB1746: Sarah Bert Cohen, New Hampshire Municipal Association Oppose01:24:06.319 - 9:23:02 AM; Sarah Bert Cohen from the New Hampshire Municipal Association opposes HB 1746, stating that while the constitution promotes government transparency, it also protects individual privacy rights. She argues that RSA 91A currently balances privacy and accountability, and this bill undermines privacy by broadly requiring disclosure of investigation records, including whistleblower information, which could hinder investigations.
HB1746: Yakov Aban Support01:25:10.880 - 9:24:06 AM; Yakov Aban supports HB 1746 based on personal experiences with lack of transparency in government investigations. He describes instances where town clerks, county attorneys, and police sergeants provided minimal or no information after complaints, such as a license plate issue, a false police report, and delayed investigations. He argues that agencies often drag out investigations to avoid disclosure and that vague laws favor agencies over transparency.
HB1746: Lori Oralano, NSHA and Right to Know New Hampshire Support01:30:06.160 - 9:29:02 AM; Lori Oralano from NSHA and Right to Know New Hampshire supports HB 1746, advocating for a balance between privacy and transparency. She shares experiences with the AG's office denying access to investigation details on trust fund mismanagement in Nashua and unauthorized practice of law complaints. She criticizes blanket exemptions under RSA 91A, notes Supreme Court rulings against per se exemptions, and calls for public reports and records post-investigation to ensure accountability without broad redactions.
HB1746: Representative Smith Information Only01:39:28.000 - 9:38:24 AM; Representative Smith moves for interim study on HB 1746, highlighting its importance for transparency but noting issues with the bill's language, including removal of RSA 91-A protections, vagueness on confidentiality, and problems with grand jury and civil/criminal distinctions. He believes passing it as is would reduce transparency and urges amendments to achieve the bill's goals.
HB1746: Committee Vote Vote01:40:27.040 - 9:39:23 AM; The committee votes unanimously (15 yes, 0 no) to recommend interim study on HB 1746.
CACR13: Representative Dennis Manion, Salem Support01:42:50.640 - 9:41:46 AM; Representative Dennis Manion introduces CACR13, explaining it seeks to eliminate the constitutional office of register of probate, which has no duties since the 2011 court reorganization merged it with the circuit court. The position remains elected but vestigial, with only a $100 salary and no office or responsibilities.
CACR13: Donna Site, former Rockingham County Register of Probate, Salem Support01:44:55.760 - 9:43:51 AM; Donna Site, a former register of probate, supports CACR13 as a housekeeping measure to finish the 2011 reorganization by removing the constitutional reference to the office. She details how duties were transferred to court clerks, leaving the elected position empty. She notes a prior 2022 ballot failure due to unclear wording (62.8% support, short of 2/3) and praises the new ballot question for clarity: 'Are you in favor of eliminating the register of probate?'
CACR13: Patrick Binder, Manchester Oppose01:50:57.439 - 9:49:53 AM; Patrick Binder opposes CACR13, arguing the 2011 reorganization unconstitutionally stripped the register of probate's duties under Article 70. He claims the office retains common law obligations as a check on court profits and that the legislature lacked power to alter it without a constitutional amendment first. He urges restoring duties instead of eliminating the office.
CACR13: Representative Coutab Vote01:54:14.960 - 9:53:10 AM; Representative Coutab moves to pass CACR13.
CACR13: Representative Rambo Vote01:54:14.960 - 9:53:10 AM; Representative Rambo seconds the motion to pass CACR13.
CACR13: Representative Alexander Support01:54:14.960 - 9:53:10 AM; Representative Alexander supports passing CACR13, noting the improved clarity of the language compared to prior versions and expressing optimism for voter approval.
CACR13: Representative Han Oppose01:55:10.240 - 9:54:06 AM; Representative Han opposes CACR13, believing the office retains value despite its high salary and truncated role, and hesitates to remove it from the constitution.
CACR13: Committee Vote Vote01:56:24.399 - 9:55:20 AM; The committee votes 13 yes, 2 no to recommend passage of CACR13.
CACR25: Representative Alice Wade, Stratford District 15 Support01:57:32.960 - 9:56:28 AM; Representative Alice Wade introduces CACR25 to protect marriage equality in the New Hampshire Constitution, citing the 2009 legalization in NH and high public support (75-82%). She warns of threats from the 2022 Dobbs decision and Justice Thomas's opinion to revisit Obergefell. The amendment protects interracial and gay marriage based on state laws and the federal Respect for Marriage Act, ensuring equal treatment without changing eligibility requirements. She mentions a minor amendment to remove redundant language and notes overwhelming online support (493 for, 7 against). As a soon-to-be-married gay woman, she urges proactive protection to provide certainty for couples.
CACR25: Kim Lawrence, New Hampshire Support02:06:10.640 - 10:05:06 AM; Kim Lawrence shares her experience moving to NH in 2011 to legally marry her wife, highlighting the instability without national recognition. She emphasizes the need for CACR25 in the current political landscape to protect marriage as a fundamental civil right regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or race. She stresses that civil rights should not depend on political power, providing stability for families in medical decisions, inheritance, and legal recognition, urging an ought to pass vote.
CACR25: Kaylee Michaels Support02:08:19.200 - 10:07:15 AM; Kaylee Michaels recounts her recent marriage to her wife in a private forest ceremony followed by a community celebration, emphasizing the human desire for love and commitment. She supports CACR25 to protect this right for everyone regardless of gender identity, race, or sex, referencing statistical support and realistic threats. She urges committee members to prioritize public responsibility over personal beliefs.
CACR25: Pasha Roberts, Wilmot, NH, Board of 603 Equality Support02:11:12.800 - 10:10:08 AM; Pasha Roberts praises NH's 2009 leadership in legalizing same-sex marriage with 80% voter popularity. She expresses concern over Supreme Court reversals like Dobbs, fearing Obergefell could be next. CACR25 protects the legal aspects of marriage (adoption, taxes, death benefits) as a key human experience, aligning with NH's 'live free or die' ethos of non-interference in family formation. She urges passing it for protection, even if Obergefell seems safe.
CACR25: Representative Heath Howard, Stratford and Barrington, District 4 Support02:13:23.040 - 10:12:19 AM; Representative Heath Howard, a straight cisgender man, supports CACR25 to protect people from government intrusion into personal decisions like marriage. The amendment ensures no denial based on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or race, and equal treatment for all valid marriages, including those from other states. He emphasizes keeping government out of private lives.
CACR25: Amy Teravicia, Executive Director of 603 Equality, LGBTQ community member Support02:16:13.359 - 10:15:09 AM; Amy Teravicia recalls pre-marriage equality obstacles for her family in hospital visits, insurance, and cohabitation. She supports CACR25 as a proactive measure to enshrine marriage equality as a fundamental civil right in the state constitution, protecting against federal challenges and providing safety for NH families amid growing concerns from rhetoric and judicial threats.
CACR25: Nancy Brennan, Wer (likely Warner), NH Support02:20:30.880 - 10:19:26 AM; Nancy Brennan, married for 57 years as a straight cis white woman, supports CACR25 despite her privilege. She notes 31 states have laws banning same-sex marriage if Obergefell is overturned, similar to post-Dobbs abortion bans, and nine states have attempted challenges. The amendment ensures marriage rights for all, as what affects some affects all.
CACR25: Patrick Bender, Manchester, NH Oppose02:22:00.000 - 10:20:56 AM; Patrick Bender opposes CACR25, arguing marriage is not a natural right under Articles 2 and 3 of the NH Constitution but a civic privilege via licensing. He believes the state should not enshrine it constitutionally, suggesting instead amending Article 2 to include protections for sexuality. He views current RSA marriage laws as non-constitutional except for divorce, advocating inexpedient to legislate.
CACR25: Jennifer Smith, Pembroke, NH Support02:24:17.920 - 10:23:13 AM; Jennifer Smith, married to her wife for 33 years and transgender, shares struggles with gender recognition pre-marriage equality. She warns of confusion if Obergefell is overturned, especially regarding out-of-state marriages and privileges/ obligations of marriage (e.g., divorce requirements). She urges enshrining protections in the NH Constitution due to real threats.
CACR25: Sarah Smith Support02:26:56.479 - 10:25:52 AM; Sarah Smith testified in support of CACR25, emphasizing the importance of marriage equality for her 33-year marriage to Jennifer Smith, who transitioned. She highlighted the benefits they would lose without legal protections, including federal rights like Social Security survivor benefits, tax benefits, and immigration rights, as well as state rights such as adoption, child custody, inheritance, hospital visitation, spousal privileges, and health insurance access. She shared a personal example of taking half of her wife's Social Security benefits until age 70 and the ability to include her on work health insurance, noting that the scenario without equality would strip these rights based on sex.
CACR25: Lauren Selig, Representative, Durham, NH Support02:29:40.479 - 10:28:36 AM; Representative Lauren Selig from Durham, Strafford County District 10, expressed support for CACR25, stating that love is love and that two legal adults choosing to marry should be allowed without further debate on who can marry.
CACR25: Chad Zinski Support02:31:32.880 - 10:30:28 AM; Chad Zinski supported CACR25, arguing that the absence of marriage equality in the state constitution necessitates codifying it. He emphasized New Hampshire's 'live free or die' ethos, individual freedoms, and that marriage is a legal act with federal and 14th Amendment protections tied to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, setting personal beliefs aside.
CACR25: Alexander Prescott, Raymond, NH Support02:32:28.880 - 10:31:24 AM; Alexander Prescott, a lifelong New Hampshire resident and young lesbian woman from Raymond, supported CACR25 due to concerns over Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas's 2022 statement post-Roe v. Wade decision suggesting gay marriage rights could be next. She expressed worry for her future and felt safer staying in New Hampshire if protected by enshrining marriage equality in the state constitution.
HB1032: Timothy Oregon, Representative, Durham, NH Support03:16:14.000 - 11:15:10 AM; Representative Timothy Oregon from Strafford County District 10, Durham, introduced HB 1032, which amends RSA 91-A:2 to allow individuals with disabilities or caring for household members with disabilities to count toward quorum when participating remotely in public meetings. He noted it applies only to bodies that already allow remote participation, does not affect the legislature, and enables valuable contributions from the disability community without changing visibility or identification rules. He urged support for its benefits to accessibility.
HB1032: Lisa Steedman, Troy, NH Support03:26:03.920 - 11:24:59 AM; Lisa Steedman from Troy, a 16-year school board member and mother of a child with Down syndrome, supported HB 1032 based on her district's quorum issues due to injuries and caregiving. She shared experiences from the developmental services quality council where remote participation works, emphasized respecting open meeting laws without reducing transparency, and noted that remote options increase public participation. She advocated for in-person attendance when possible but highlighted barriers for caretakers, injured, immunocompromised, and retirees, providing examples of delayed committee work and how the bill would enable more qualified people, especially in disability and transportation groups, to serve effectively.
HB1032: Ryan Donnelly, Granite State Independent Living Support03:29:56.720 - 11:28:52 AM; Ryan Donnelly, policy analyst with Granite State Independent Living (GSIL), a nonprofit for older adults and people with disabilities, supported HB 1032. He shared his experience on the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC), a governor-appointed body subject to RSA 91-A, where his disability makes in-person attendance challenging despite care support. Remote participation risks failing quorum, delaying approvals and votes, discouraging disabled involvement. He praised the bill as a practical accommodation ensuring public bodies include lived experiences from disabled people and caregivers, enhancing policy guidance.
HB1032: Kristen Evans, Able New Hampshire Support03:34:06.561 - 11:33:02 AM; Kristen Evans, director of policy for Able New Hampshire, a disability justice organization, strongly supported HB 1032 as an accessibility correction to RSA 91-A, which excludes disabled people and caregivers via physical quorum requirements. She argued that such rules create barriers through chronic illness, inaccessible buildings, transportation issues, and caregiving needs, enforcing exclusion rather than neutrality. The bill strengthens open government by maintaining transparency safeguards while allowing full remote participation, preventing sacrifice of health or duty. It ensures disabled voices, shaped by systemic navigation, inform decisions, fostering inclusive democracy.
HB1032: Karen Rosenberg, Disability Rights Center New Hampshire Support03:37:09.359 - 11:36:05 AM; Karen Rosenberg, policy director at the Disability Rights Center New Hampshire, the state's protection and advocacy system, supported HB 1032 to promote inclusive communities without barriers for disabled participation on public bodies. Current law disincentivizes appointing disabled members or caregivers due to remote participation not counting toward quorum, risking stalled work. She shared her experience on the state advisory committee for children and youth with disabilities, where remote options during the pandemic enabled inclusion but quorum rules prevented progress. The bill removes this barrier, allowing voices of disabled people and caregivers to contribute without fear of operational disruption.
HB1040: Tur, Representative Support03:40:17.200 - 11:39:13 AM; Representative Tur introduced HB 1040, prompted by a 92-year-old constituent's concerns about title theft via quitclaim deeds. He described it as a growing issue targeting the elderly, often remotely, affecting vacant land and occupied homes, with high incentives due to property value. New Hampshire lags other states, and the bill proposes a study committee to evaluate options like filing discretion, required language, proof for out-of-state filers, and blockchain. He noted quickclaim deeds' ease and lack of distinction from warranty deeds, registers' mandatory filing, and the AG's June 2025 alert on fraud prevention. A national survey showed 92% of Northeast states reported incidents, emphasizing prevention to avoid NH becoming a target.
HB1040: Katherine Baraby, representing the Registry of Deeds Association Information Only03:50:50.878 - 11:49:46 AM; Katherine Baraby testified on the importance of including a representative from the New Hampshire Bar Association's real estate section on any study committee examining quick claim deeds. She highlighted confusion among the public regarding deeds and their creation, emphasizing the need for expert input to address these issues.
HB1040: Nancy D'Angelus, Assistant Attorney General, Elder Abuse and Exploitation Unit Information Only03:57:36.560 - 11:56:32 AM; Nancy D'Angelus provided an overview of deed fraud investigations, describing a composite case involving impersonation using warranty deeds. She explained how scammers pose as owners online, use fake emails, digital signatures, forged notaries, and remote closings to transfer property and steal funds. Victims often discover the fraud via IRS forms. She noted title insurance limitations and emerging endorsements for future fraud coverage, but stressed that these scams typically involve cash sales at below-market value to avoid detection.
HB1040: Representative Tur Vote04:05:02.718 - 12:03:58 PM; Representative Tur moved to pass HB 1040, recommending it ought to pass with the establishment of a legislative study committee on quick claim deeds. The motion was seconded by Representative Smith and passed unanimously 15-0, placing it on the consent calendar.
HB1115 2026-019: Representative McFarland, bill sponsor Support04:07:30.160 - 12:06:26 PM; Representative McFarland introduced HB 1115 to provide a uniform statutory definition of a New Hampshire citizen as someone who is a U.S. citizen and domiciled in the state, per the 14th Amendment. He noted frequent undefined uses of 'citizen' in statutes (about 20 state-specific and 50 U.S.-related references) and the need to clarify to avoid confusion. He referenced a prior unconstitutional bill and suggested clarifying language in RSA 110-B:81 for New Hampshire medals of honor via the amendment.
HB1115 2026-019: Representative Wary Support04:11:28.878 - 12:10:24 PM; Representative Wary supported the bill, discussing historical context from the New Hampshire Constitution's Article 11, amended in 1968 to remove 'born or naturalized therein,' causing confusion. He recommended establishing state-specific criteria like an oath for naturalization for U.S. citizens moving to NH, akin to federal processes, to restore original intent. He mentioned his related bill HB 1520 on voting citizenship before the Election Law Committee.
HB1115 2026-019: Liz Tentterelli, President, League of Women Voters of New Hampshire Information Only04:14:42.160 - 12:13:38 PM; Liz Tentterelli expressed confusion, believing she had prepared testimony for a different bill, possibly HB 1520. She emphasized ensuring voting laws require U.S. citizenship proof, not additional NH-specific documentation, as no such proof exists. She cautioned against changes that could burden voter registration and affirmed non-citizens should not vote in NH elections.
HB1115 2026-019: Patrick Binder, from Manchester Support04:17:03.200 - 12:15:59 PM; Patrick Binder supported defining 'New Hampshire citizen' in statutes for clarity. He endorsed processes for state citizenship, noting pre-14th Amendment concepts, and favored 'domiciled' over 'resides' for stronger legal ties, preventing multi-state citizenship.
HB1156: Representative David Walker, from Rochester Support04:33:22.558 - 12:32:18 PM; Representative Walker introduced HB 1156FN to require estate administrators to notify local officials of inherited real estate, certify to probate court, and record notices at the county registry of deeds before final accounting, with fees allowed. This ensures timely updates to ownership records, preventing misdirected tax/water bills, liens, and title issues upon resale, as current voluntary notifications often fail.
HB1156: Jim Misho, Chief Assessor, Town of Hudson Support04:35:37.599 - 12:34:33 PM; Jim Misho supports the bill, explaining that current probate notices are not timely or reliable, leading to issues like incorrect property ownership records, unpaid taxes, improper exemptions and credits for deceased owners, and problems with tax deferrals. He notes that assessors can only back-bill within one tax year and that the bill would ensure the registry of deeds remains a reliable repository for real estate ownership.
HB1156: Brody Deay, New Hampshire Municipal Association Support04:37:32.797 - 12:36:28 PM; Brody Deay explains that the New Hampshire Municipal Association requested this bill to amend RSA 554:18-a by adding a sentence requiring administrators to record deeds with the registry of deeds. This would reduce administrative burdens on local officials, improve tracking of property ownership for tax exemptions and billing, and ensure proper documentation. The bill has support from local officials, including the New Hampshire Association of Counties and a register of deeds.
HB1156: Katherine Barabby, New Hampshire Registry of Deeds Association Support04:39:26.718 - 12:38:22 PM; Katherine Barabby states that the New Hampshire Registry of Deeds Association supports the bill, as it clearly identifies who receives property through probate via inheritance or devise, making it a common-sense measure to improve transparency in ownership records.
HB1156: Joanie McIntyre, New Hampshire Association of Realtors Support04:40:35.040 - 12:39:31 PM; Joanie McIntyre, a real estate agent and vice chair of public policy for the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, supports the bill because it ensures the registry of deeds accurately reflects the chain of ownership for properties inherited or devised. She highlights its importance for verifying titles, detecting liens, fraud, and short sales, making real estate transactions easier and more reliable.
HB1156: Representative Rombo Vote04:58:12.400 - 12:57:08 PM; Moves that HB 1156FN ought to pass. Seconded by Representative Coutab. No discussion.
HB1156: Committee Vote Vote04:58:12.400 - 12:57:08 PM; The committee votes 14 yes, 0 no to recommend HB 1156FN ought to pass. Placed on the consent calendar.
HB1333: Representative Manos Vote04:59:37.680 - 12:58:33 PM; Moves Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) for HB 1333. Seconded by Representative Smith.
HB1333: Representative Good Information Only04:59:37.680 - 12:58:33 PM; Supports ITL, noting the bill's problematic structure where assault on a pregnant woman could be first-degree assault but lead to first-degree murder under another statute. Points out gaps in current law regarding non-consensual induced abortions and suggests minor amendments, but concludes the bill as written is flawed.
HB1333: Committee Vote Vote05:01:58.480 - 1:00:54 PM; The committee votes 14 yes, 0 no for ITL on HB 1333. Placed on consent.
HB1436: Representative Alexander Vote05:01:58.480 - 1:00:54 PM; Moves Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) for HB 1436. Seconded by Representative Trip.
HB1436: Representative Trip Oppose05:01:58.480 - 1:00:54 PM; Acknowledges merit in addressing cloud ownership issues but opposes passage due to complexities, potential federal jurisdiction, and lack of confidence in state-level resolution at this time.
HB1436: Representative Smith Oppose05:02:50.160 - 1:01:46 PM; Opposes the bill due to uncertainties around cloud storage and personal data control, comparing it to safe deposit boxes, and expresses reluctance to decide based on personal prejudices.
HB1436: Representative McFarland Information Only05:04:10.638 - 1:03:06 PM; Representative McFarland addresses concerns about the privacy of contents in a safe deposit box, noting that he is not representing the law on inspecting such contents but opines that even if inspected, encrypted data within would not be accessible. He compares this to cloud storage, suggesting that personal data remains safer in a safe deposit box than in the cloud under certain circumstances.
HB1436: Unnamed Representative Oppose05:04:56.798 - 1:03:52 PM; The speaker expresses concern that the bill's language is not sufficient as it stands, particularly worrying about the inclusion of metadata. They indicate a desire to refine the bill to make it passable but currently oppose it in its present form.
HB1436: Representative Tur Support05:06:04.480 - 1:05:00 PM; Representative Tur speaks in favor of the bill and intends to vote for it. He highlights the core issue as the evolution from traditional safe deposit boxes to modern cloud storage, questioning whether cloud accounts provide equivalent protection to physical safe deposit boxes. He notes the bill's narrow scope makes it feasible for state-level implementation, even if federalization would be preferable, as subpoenas would require knowing the person's residence to apply the law.

Lynn, Bob(Chairman)(R)[B]2025	Kuttab, Katelyn(Clerk)(R)[B]2025	Mannion, Dennis(V Chairman)(R)[B+]2025
Smith, Marjorie(D)[F]2025	Bergeron, Dan(D)[F]2025	Horrigan, Timothy(D)[F]2025
Berch, Paul(D)[F]2025	Turer, Eric(D)[F]2025	Scully, Kevin(R)[A-]2025
Tripp, Richard(R)[B]2025	Andrus, Louise(R)[C+]2025	Ball, Lorie(R)[B+]2025
Manos, Zoe(D)[CT]2025	Perez, Kristine(R)[B+]2025	Alexander, Joe(R)[A+]2025
McFarlane, Donald(R)[A]2025	Rombeau, Catherine(D)[CT]2025	Paige, Mark(D)[D-]2025