Committee Summary for Senate Judiciary (01/20/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB460 00:05:22.720 - 12:04:13 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the offense of loitering or prowling.	Ricciardi, Denise(R)[B]2025
SB625 00:17:26.319 - 12:16:17 PM	Public Hearing	permitting family members of homicide victims to seek an evidentiary hearing in cases where the department of justice does not file charges in the case.	Birdsell, Regina(R)[B-]2025
SB466 01:27:54.000 - 1:26:45 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the possession of a firearm without a serial number.	Gannon, Bill(R)[B-]2025
SB555 01:43:40.000 - 1:42:31 PM	Public Hearing	relative to critical risk protection orders.	Altschiller, Debra(D)[CT]2025
SB463 02:33:08.080 - 2:31:59 PM	Public Hearing	relative to possession of firearms in safe school zones.	Fenton, Donovan(D)[F]2025

SB460: Senator Denise Rashardi, District 9 Support00:05:22.720 - 12:04:13 PM; Senator Rashardi introduced SB460FN, requested by the Department of Safety, which targets high-risk sex offenders who committed offenses against children under 13. The bill prohibits these individuals from knowingly appearing within 1,000 feet of schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and similar locations under circumstances that warrant alarm. It provides law enforcement a preventive tool to intervene before harm occurs, without imposing broad restrictions like residency bans or employment limits, balancing public safety and civil liberties.
SB460: Jackie Cowell, Executive Director, Early Learning New Hampshire Support00:07:55.840 - 12:06:46 PM; Jackie Cowell expressed support for SB460, noting it originated from field concerns discussed in Zoom calls with over 100 participants. Childcare providers raised issues with local police unable to act on suspicious individuals near facilities. The idea was brought to the Department of Safety by field representatives, and she praised it as a reasonable, common-sense measure co-sponsored by committee members.
SB460: Molly Trembley, Center Director, Claremont, NH Support00:09:50.399 - 12:08:41 PM; Molly Trembley, testifying for the first time, described ongoing issues at her childcare center in Claremont where registered sex offenders stand on sidewalks, stare through windows, drive by, and take pictures of children. Police stated they could do nothing to prevent this. She highlighted the unfair burden on vulnerable children in foster or protective care, staff who must monitor the registry, and the resulting unsafe atmosphere that affects educators and children alike. She urged support for the bill to prioritize child safety.
SB460: Eddie Everis, Commissioner, Department of Safety (with Captain Vic Muzzy, NH State Police) Information Only00:13:56.800 - 12:12:47 PM; Commissioner Everis and Captain Muzzy provided clarification on the bill's language, emphasizing that it targets luring, prowling, or loitering under circumstances warranting alarm, not mere presence. They noted that simply walking past such areas does not trigger the prohibition; suspicious lingering behavior does. Regarding the 1,000-foot buffer (about two-tenths of a mile), they affirmed it allows offenders sufficient navigability in cities like Manchester, as daycares, schools, and churches are not so densely placed as to block movement, provided they avoid loitering.
SB625: Senator Regina Birdsell, District 19 (Derry, Hampstead, Windham) Support00:17:26.319 - 12:16:17 PM; Senator Birdsell introduced SB 625, explaining it stems from a flawed investigation in a spousal homicide case where no charges were filed. The bill allows parents, spouses, or children of homicide victims to request a written explanation from the Department of Justice (DOJ) if no charges are filed or retrial sought after a hung jury. It applies to cases ruled homicide by the medical examiner, closed investigations without charges, or mistrials in murder cases. If unsatisfied, families can petition the superior court for review, potentially leading to an evidentiary hearing. The bill provides closure for families, similar to laws in 11 other states. She addressed questions on DOJ's discretion, court's role, and how it ensures a second review of evidence.
SB625: Senator Oshel Information Only00:23:29.679 - 12:22:20 PM; Senator Oshel questioned Senator Birdsell on how families get closure if DOJ is not required to provide explanations, the discretion in holding evidentiary hearings, and the court's written determination on probable cause without detailed reasoning. Senator Birdsell clarified that the bill pushes families to court for review, where judges can demand investigative reports and provide written closure, acting as an independent check on investigations.
SB625: Len and Karen Perkins, family of Michael Carney (Derry) Support00:27:05.520 - 12:25:56 PM; Len and Karen Perkins testified in strong support of SB 625, citing the murder of Michael Carney by his wife Nicole in 2017, where no charges were filed despite evidence of a flawed investigation. They detailed inconsistencies in the AG's report, such as claims of estrangement contradicted by text messages, evidence tampering (Nicole deleting messages post-shooting), mortgage fraud, and interference by Keen Police Chief Brian Costa. They described years of stalled 91A requests, retaliation against dissenting officers, and unfulfilled promises from the AG's office for meetings and explanations. Witnesses and retired officers later came forward with concerns about staged scenes and squashed evidence. They suggested amendments: remove non-retroactivity and expand petitioners to include siblings/next of kin. They emphasized the bill ensures due process and closure, criticizing the lack of compassion in delivering the AG report and the need for families to fight for basic information.
SB625: Lauren Warner, Deputy General Counsel, Judicial Branch Information Only00:46:37.440 - 12:45:28 PM; Lauren Warner provided neutral information on the bill's judicial impact, noting no position but highlighting fiscal and procedural concerns. Petitions filed in the homicide's jurisdiction would recuse local judges from any future criminal case, potentially requiring an additional superior court judge (as per fiscal note). Evidentiary hearings could involve reviewing DOJ files, witness credibility, and cross-examination, raising questions on attorney representation, public status, and suspects gaining early notice of evidence. The probable cause standard differs from the beyond reasonable doubt needed for conviction, and court recommendations do not bind DOJ. She addressed questions on grand jury recusals, public hearings, and prosecutorial discretion, clarifying these create workload pressures but ultimate decisions remain with DOJ.
SB625: Senator Abvis Information Only00:50:33.520 - 12:49:24 PM; Senator Abvis asked about potential impacts on grand jury investigations, noting that judges involved in petitions would be recused from overseeing grand juries due to prior evidence exposure.
SB625: Senator Al Information Only00:51:33.200 - 12:50:24 PM; Senator Al sought clarification on judge recusals for future trials and whether conflicts arise only hypothetically if charges are filed. Warner confirmed recusals apply if charges follow, but acknowledged the bill targets cases without charges, making it a 'tomorrow problem' that justifies fiscal needs like an extra judge.
SB625: Unidentified Senator Information Only00:54:51.680 - 12:53:42 PM; The senator questioned if the bill forces prosecutors to advance weak cases due to differing proof standards (probable cause vs. beyond reasonable doubt) and ethical concerns. Warner noted the bill uses probable cause for recommendations but leaves final decisions to DOJ, potentially adding pressure without mandating action.
SB625: J. E. Simkin Information Only00:56:48.880 - 12:55:39 PM; J. E. Simkin, a non-attorney, testified neutrally, raising constitutional concerns about judicial interference in executive prosecutorial discretion on probable cause. He questioned if similar laws in other states have faced Supreme Court review and whether the bill could undermine self-defense claims in non-stand-your-ground states like NH. He highlighted the high costs of legal defense in evidentiary hearings, using his personal $125,000, 3.5-year litigation experience in Massachusetts as an example, arguing such hearings could be meaningless without addressing affordability.
SB625: Unidentified Speaker Oppose01:01:17.920 - 1:00:08 PM; The speaker expresses concerns about SB 625 FN, arguing it will create tensions and conflicts between judges and prosecutors. They note that if a judge recommends revisiting a case due to probable cause, prosecutors might disregard it to avoid future biases. The speaker understands the bill's purpose but suggests alternative ways to achieve objectives without these difficulties.
SB625: State Representative Matt Saborn Dwan, Rockingham District 30 Support01:02:58.880 - 1:01:49 PM; Representative Saborn Dwan introduces the bill and supports it by bringing forward Anna Randle, a constituent whose son was murdered, to share her story. He expresses appreciation for Senator Bell sponsoring the legislation.
SB625: Anna Randle Support01:03:30.000 - 1:02:21 PM; Anna Randle, a mother grieving her son Christopher's 2021 murder by Gerredo Fort, a repeat felon, shares her story to advocate for the bill. She details Fort's criminal history, including assaults, kidnappings, and illegal firearm possession despite a restraining order. On October 31, 2021, a minor car scuff escalated; the next morning, Fort premeditatedly confronted and shot Christopher and Richard Jamron Jr., killing Christopher instantly. Despite video evidence, the coroner's homicide ruling, and Attorney General's initial assessment, no state charges were filed, citing inability to disprove self-defense. Randle argues self-defense should be a jury matter, not a prosecutorial barrier, and seeks accountability for the Attorney General's office to ensure justice for victims' families.
SB625: Donna (Lieutenant Steven McAlby) Support01:14:42.960 - 1:13:33 PM; Donna, a long-time friend of Anna Randle (39 years) and like an aunt to Christopher, adds to the testimony. She emphasizes Gerredo Fort's extensive history of violence in Massachusetts, including restraining orders, kidnappings, and resisting arrests, predating the incident, to underscore his dangerous nature.
SB625: Benjamin Agatt, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice Information Only01:16:20.239 - 1:15:11 PM; Agatt testifies neutrally on SB 625, highlighting three issues: (1) High cost, nearly $1 million annually for DOJ and judicial branch per fiscal notes; (2) Existing RSA 91-A system for sharing materials and final reports available on the DOJ website; (3) Constitutional concerns, as the bill requires superior courts to issue advisory opinions on facts, violating Part 2, Article 74, which limits such opinions to the Supreme Court for legislative or gubernatorial questions—requiring constitutional amendments, including one for victim intervenors. He clarifies 'homicide' as a medical term (death by another's hand) used by the chief medical examiner, distinct from legal definitions, and notes it applies to cases like police shootings. During Q&A, he explains reinvestigations occur with new evidence, charges are not brought if unable to prove beyond reasonable doubt due to ethical obligations, and reports are not final preclusions.
SB466: Senator Bill Ganon (Prime Sponsor) Support01:27:54.000 - 1:26:45 PM; Senator Ganon briefly introduces SB 466 and announces a committee amendment changing the focus from altering or removing serial numbers to making mere possession of a firearm with obliterated serial numbers a class A felony, regardless of who defaced it. He clarifies it targets firearms that should have serial numbers but do not, not homemade 'ghost guns' without them.
SB466: Rock Revel, Captain, Manchester Police Department Support01:28:58.719 - 1:27:49 PM; Captain Revel, with 28 years as a police officer, supports SB 466. He explains that obliterated serial numbers prevent tracking stolen firearms via NCIC database, currently penalized as a misdemeanor while possession of a stolen firearm is a felony, effectively rewarding defacement. Serial numbers are vital for tracing straw purchases and investigations; without them, illegal activity persists anonymously. He urges the committee to pass the bill to hold criminals accountable and enhance state safety.
SB466: Unidentified Federal Firearms Dealer Information Only01:33:52.480 - 1:32:43 PM; The dealer, holding a federal firearms license for over 40 years (33 in NH), notes SB 466 replicates federal law (18 USC 922(k)). He suggests amendments to improve its utility and shares that there are no federal regulations on a specific unrevealed topic, based on diligent inquiry.
SB466: Unidentified Firearms Expert Information Only01:35:12.400 - 1:34:03 PM; The speaker discusses the lack of uniform standards for firearm documentation and serial numbers, noting that prior to the 1968 Gun Control Act, many firearms lacked serial numbers. They suggest amendments: 1) Explicitly recognize pre-1968 firearms without serial numbers to avoid false allegations of removal. 2) Insert 'knowingly' in the bill's language to align with federal law. 3) Account for hidden serial numbers, as dealers are not gunsmiths and should not dismantle firearms. 4) Include an exception for corrosion-damaged serial numbers due to rust on steel components. 5) Add an exemption for law enforcement in official duties to allow seizure of such firearms without prosecution risk. They question the frequency of standalone federal prosecutions for obliterated serial numbers.
SB555: Senator Deborah Uler, Senate District 24 (Exeter, Greenland, Hampton, Hampton Falls, North Hampton, Rye, Stratham) Support01:43:40.000 - 1:42:31 PM; Senator Uler introduced SB 555 as a public safety measure to prevent suicides by temporarily restricting firearm access for individuals at significant risk of harm to themselves or others. She highlighted stark suicide statistics in New Hampshire, noting that suicide is the second leading cause of death for ages 10-34, with 50% involving firearms, which are lethal in 90% of attempts. She discussed disparities, such as 55% of male and 28% of female suicides involving firearms, and 71% for veterans. She presented data on gun violence from 2020-2024, including 722 suicides and 84 homicides across counties. Uler identified gaps in existing laws like domestic violence orders, stalking orders, and involuntary commitments, which require crimes or high thresholds, leaving families with only wellness checks that prove insufficient. SB 555 fills this gap with a civil petition process for family, household members, or law enforcement, requiring evidence of risk patterns, court hearings with due process, and temporary firearm removal to allow intervention. She analogized to successful opioid responses like naloxone and task forces, emphasizing comprehensive strategies over perfect prevention. Uler shared tragic stories from her district and state: George Tilton, 23, who repeatedly accessed firearms during crises due to lack of restrictions and died by suicide; Britney Weston and son Benson murdered in Troy; Ryan Long and family killed in Madbury by his wife amid documented mental health struggles; Cindy and Crystal Moody shot in Bath; and referenced the Lewiston, Maine shooting where warnings were ignored. She urged the committee to recommend Ought to Pass, noting 22 states have similar laws, and included a fact sheet from Johns Hopkins.
SB555: Senator (Unspecified) Information Only01:55:47.599 - 1:54:38 PM; The senator mentions upcoming testimony from the John Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions and the New Hampshire Psychiatric Society in support. A question is posed about temporary relief under the bill (lines 19-21 on G4) regarding proceeding without notice to the respondent, comparing it to domestic violence cases under 173B. The response affirms that the process is established and courts are familiar with it.
SB555: Mr. Simkin, Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer Oppose01:57:17.360 - 1:56:08 PM; Mr. Simkin, a federally licensed firearms dealer with over 40 years of experience, including 30 in New Hampshire, testifies against SB 555. He argues the bill promotes a dangerous myth that court orders can prevent access to firearms for those in peril, and it has irreparable flaws. He recommends voting it inexpedient to legislate. Key points: (1) With approximately 512 million firearms in the US (citing US Treasury and DOJ data), the bill won't stop determined individuals from obtaining weapons, as supply vastly exceeds demand from criminals or the mentally unwell. (2) Police have no constitutional duty to protect individuals, per established US jurisprudence (citing Bowers v. Devito, 1982). (3) New Hampshire's minimal gun laws contribute to its safety as one of the safest states. He warns the bill could falsely accuse innocents, permanently barring them from firearm ownership via federal databases due to the supremacy clause.
SB555: Unnamed Speaker Oppose02:02:39.440 - 2:01:30 PM; The speaker argues against SB 555, citing the US Supreme Court case Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005) to assert there is no legal right to police protection under restraining orders. They highlight New Hampshire's low violent crime rate, ranking in the top three safest states since 2001 per FBI data, suggesting the bill addresses a non-issue. They propose a secure facility for dangerous individuals instead and criticizes the bill for not preventing firearm access by those with harmful mindsets. The speaker suggests voting inexpedient to legislate, questions Senator Al Schiller's involvement in suicide prevention bills, and notes the bill's purpose is suicide prevention but cannot work effectively.
SB555: Holly Stevens, NAMI New Hampshire Support02:08:22.639 - 2:07:13 PM; Holly Stevens, Director of Public Policy at NAMI New Hampshire, supports SB 555 as a suicide prevention measure. She notes the US Surgeon General's 2024 identification of suicide as a preventable public health crisis, emphasizing that 90% of suicide attempt survivors do not die by suicide, but firearms are nearly always lethal. She stresses temporarily restricting firearm access during mental health crises, aligning with the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention. In New Hampshire, gun suicide rates rose 55% from 2009-2018, higher than the national 19%, with suicide being the leading cause of death for ages 10-14, second for 15-34, and third for 35-44. An average of 124 annual gun suicides occur, making the bill a common-sense step to save lives. She mentions broader suicide prevention efforts like training for teachers and police.
SB555: Unnamed Speaker Oppose02:11:55.520 - 2:10:46 PM; The speaker opposes SB 555, calling it draconian gun control legislation pushed by a New York City billionaire, despite spending over a million dollars in efforts. They argue New Hampshire is one of the safest states, designated safest in 2025, and the bill targets law-abiding gun owners without crimes committed. Petitioners can make unsubstantiated claims to confiscate firearms, even ex-roommates, acting like 'thought police.' It grants excessive power to law enforcement, infringing on self-defense rights. On suicide, they question why not improve involuntary commitment laws or open more mental institutions instead. They note the bill discriminates against gun owners, ignoring other suicide methods like hanging, and violates multiple constitutional amendments including the 4th, 5th, 6th, 14th, and 2nd. They urge voting inexpedient to legislate.
SB555: Bonnie Downey, Newmarket Oppose02:16:04.239 - 2:14:55 PM; Bonnie Downey from Newmarket opposes SB 555, viewing it as gun control disguised as mental health legislation that fails to provide real help. She criticizes giving special weight to family or friends' opinions, noting professionals avoid evaluating relatives due to bias, leading to inaccurate assessments and no protections against false accusations from estranged relatives. The bill allows firearm removal for those deemed at risk but ignores access to other lethal means like knives, ropes, medications, or cars. It does not address the underlying mindset driving harm. Downey urges not passing the bill, as it strips Second Amendment rights without supporting those truly at risk.
SB555: Lauren Celig, Durham Support02:18:23.040 - 2:17:14 PM; Lauren Celig from Durham supports SB 555, sharing a personal story of a mother who, amid financial and emotional turmoil including her husband's fatal cancer, spiraled and killed her two older children, husband, and herself by gunfire in 2025, leaving only a toddler. The family's connections to Celig's daughter highlighted the tragedy's impact. She notes social media cries for help went unaddressed under current laws without psychiatric holds. Recent incidents include a domestic violence murder-suicide and another family killing on a bridge between Portsmouth and Kittery. Celig argues SB 555 is a public safety step to enable interventions based on visible risks, urging passage to save lives, acknowledging it's not a complete solution but essential, and shares her daughter's trauma ruling out teaching.
SB555: Unnamed Speaker Support02:22:37.680 - 2:21:28 PM; The speaker supports SB 555, noting similar bills have been introduced since 2020 after Governor Sununu's veto of HB 687, failing due to lack of majority but gaining urgency from tragedies in cities like Buffalo, Uvalde, Lewiston, and Providence. They highlight 38,722 US gun deaths last year, 62% suicides, with 80% telegraphing intentions. The bill allows family or law enforcement petitions for temporary firearm restrictions for those at imminent risk. Opponents' claims of unconstitutionality are refuted: 21 states have similar laws upheld in courts, with Maine becoming the 22nd via referendum post-Lewiston. Due process includes hearings within 5 days, evidentiary proceedings, and Supreme Court precedents for post-deprivation process in urgent safety matters. The speaker urges a strong ought to pass recommendation to save lives and prevent local tragedies.
SB555: Kathleen Slover from Portsmouth Support02:28:12.720 - 2:27:03 PM; Kathleen Slover urges the committee to vote ought to pass on SB 555. She references an op-ed by Anne Jordan supporting Maine's red flag law, notes that 75% of Granite Staters approve of protective orders prohibiting dangerous individuals from buying guns, and cites an FBI report on observable behaviors preceding active shooter incidents. She highlights the rising gun death rates and the effectiveness of extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) for suicide prevention, providing a link to a 2024 study. Slover argues that ERPOs provide due process, align with constitutional standards post-Bruen, and are often initiated by law enforcement for those in crisis. She concludes with an excerpt from testimony about a suicide, emphasizing the need for tools to intervene during crises.
SB463: Senator Donovan Fenton, District 10 Support02:33:08.080 - 2:31:59 PM; Senator Donovan Fenton introduces SB 463, speaking as a legislator, gun owner, and father. He clarifies the bill does not restrict lawful gun ownership or self-defense but establishes gun-free school zones to remove ambiguity for teachers and staff. Fenton references 233 school shootings this year and shares a personal story about explaining lockdown drills to his son. He argues current law allows adults to carry firearms into schools without clear guidance, increasing risks, and contrasts this with the identifiable threat in the Concord hospital shooting. The bill requires securing firearms in vehicles during drop-off/pick-up, exempts law enforcement and military, and aims to prioritize school safety without conflicting with Second Amendment rights.
SB463: Mr. Simkin Oppose02:36:55.600 - 2:35:46 PM; Mr. Simkin opposes SB 463, comparing it to a Massachusetts law that criminalizes firearms on school property without exemptions for licensed carriers unless authorized by school officials. He argues the bill won't deter mass murderers but will harm law-abiding citizens, such as voters at polling places in schools where he holds a New Hampshire license. Simkin cites data showing New Hampshire's low violent crime rates compared to Massachusetts despite stricter gun laws there, from 1985 to 2022. He suggests the bill is futile, potentially requiring costly signage, and recommends voting it inexpedient to legislate to avoid ensnaring law-abiding individuals.
SB463: Kimberly Morren, Women's Defense League Oppose02:42:26.000 - 2:41:17 PM; Kimberly Morren argues that SB 463 impacts parents, especially single mothers protecting themselves from abusive partners or stalkers during school drop-offs. She notes federal law already makes public schools gun-free zones, prohibiting open carry without a concealed carry permit. Morren opposes requiring school permission for carrying, viewing it as infringing on Second Amendment rights, and highlights New Hampshire's status as one of the safest states. She claims the bill won't enhance safety, as mass shootings increased post-1990s Gun-Free School Zones Act, and serves only to limit self-defense capabilities.
SB463: Kathleen Slover from Portsmouth Support02:45:18.720 - 2:44:09 PM; Kathleen Slover supports SB 463, noting New Hampshire lacks a state law prohibiting firearms on school grounds except for students, leading to risks like lost weapons or armed parents at events. She references a 2023 incident outside Portsmouth High School where a man threatened a shooting and possessed firearms legally on school grounds, endangering her son. Slover argues the absence of state law creates confusion for administrators and police, especially after 2022 legislation blocking federal firearm regulations. She cites RAND research finding gun-free zones inconclusive but effective for norms and clarity, passing Second Amendment scrutiny per Bruen, and helping distinguish threats from lawful carriers.
SB463: Mr. Musu, backup representative Support02:48:27.200 - 2:47:18 PM; Mr. Musu provides comments on SB 463 without prepared remarks, referencing the Brown University shooting and noting multi-generational trauma from events like Parkland. He emphasizes restricting firearms on school grounds due to the location's sensitivity, as recognized in Supreme Court decisions like Heller and Bruen for 'sensitive places' like schools. Musu highlights risks from dropped weapons, misfirings, or escalating arguments, questioning why carrying firearms in schools is necessary and advocating for agreement on restrictions to enhance safety.
SB463: Representative Muse Support02:51:33.120 - 2:50:24 PM; Representative Muse supports SB 463 by recalling a past bill allowing guns on university campuses opposed by colleague David Welch due to his grandchild at UNH. He emphasizes the need for protections against firearms in schools, similar to federal prohibitions, and urges passage of the bill to enforce these in New Hampshire. During questioning, he addresses concerns about exceptions for picking up or dropping off students, noting that firearms must be unloaded and locked but can be handled responsibly, and compares it to courthouse restrictions where planning ahead is required.
SB463: Sarah Toliffson, Goffstown Support02:57:33.600 - 2:56:24 PM; Sarah Toliffson, a private resident from Goffstown and co-founder of Goffstown Parents in Action, supports SB 463. As a nonpartisan group formed after Uvalde to prevent gun violence in schools, they successfully advocated for school safety measures like door barricading devices. Married to a law enforcement officer with secured firearms at home, she emphasizes logic and protecting children over politics. She argues the bill addresses location-based risks in schools, aligns with existing restrictions in courthouses and events, preserves local control with exceptions, and upholds New Hampshire traditions while protecting vulnerable children. She invites discussion on expanding Goffstown's safety model statewide.
SB463: Mr. Simpkin Oppose03:00:26.240 - 2:59:17 PM; Mr. Simpkin provides factual information in response to a question about why firearms are prohibited in courthouses but not schools. He states that courthouses have armed security due to the presence of violent criminals, similar to prisons with perimeter security. He implies schools do not have comparable threats justifying such prohibitions, correcting earlier testimony and positioning himself as a source of sound facts.

Gannon, Bill(Chairman)(R)[B-]2025	Abbas, Daryl(V Chairman)(R)[B-]2025	Carson, Sharon(R)[B]2025
Altschiller, Debra(D)[CT]2025	Reardon, Tara(D)[F]2025