[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6682190,"mediaKeyId","2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d","parentId",2347753,"title","Supporters and opponents spar as committee hears bill to repeal state paid family and medical leave","audioSeconds",16588,"startMs",22020000,"endMs",5432000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d&start=22020&end=5432","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d/thumbnail_22020000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6682190/New-Hampshire/Supporters-and-opponents-spar-as-committee-hears-bill-to-repeal-state-paid-family-and-medical-leave","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682190-2b4bffbe1bff704a09bd20951612098c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178587&Signature=CI8uB5hLwv7St486dc6ePfpwqevVoVZ1BWF5xxWs7XGULGbc0d5HW03X77ikdTdQREhXzXJgvfX07j4KUdVfIVWLV4EbFCeXygj4B9EQ7rWkeiQ5dzLiPQseo8Zs-uKw97x5tTMUc4COmFXRbN6vHj6FIAaYMZ1N4AVVx-atJ2tAqdTGuvfhUfoxBSbbLXRLJFgBrmDcJ6Gl~8Ev6urynhYHvICZ1pwF~SbVAX44LVaZ5tbUbwjDWDBNHmqhgdOjGKkQulV2n9cIb1DTQnEUNMqMR-841I05abLq4OqRPuo5dJj-~1OjijXr-R3clHz8jL8ZJPArkLaecc4-eGKMcw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-02-19T22:28:10.09Z","article","Representative Lehi Turcotte told the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee he introduced House Bill 517 to repeal New Hampshire’s paid family and medical leave program — the “FMLI” — arguing the program has not achieved its stated goals and places an unfair cost burden on taxpayers.

“This program has been up and running for three years,” Rep. Turcotte said. “About 10,500 state employees receive the coverage paid by taxpayers, and private employer uptake is very low. It’s time to end the taxpayer obligation.”

Turcotte presented enrollment figures and fiscal estimates to argue the program failed to attract private employers at scale and that state employees were placed on the taxpayer payroll for an unsustainable entitlement. He said participation numbers showed only a small fraction of New Hampshire workers have coverage through the voluntary program and cited implementation and advertising costs used to stand up the program.

At the same hearing, commissioners and agency officials that designed and implemented the program defended it and urged the committee not to repeal.

DJ Bettencourt, commissioner of the New Hampshire Insurance Department, told the committee insurers and regulators designed a market‑oriented model and contracted a carrier, MetLife, which bears program risk and administers coverage. “By having state employees form the foundational risk pool — roughly 9,000 state employees at launch — the carrier could derive actuarially sound rates and make coverage available voluntarily to employers and individuals,” he said. Bettencourt said MetLife retains the financial risk for claim experience and that private carriers are now offering supplemental products.

Cassie Keane, deputy commissioner at the Department of Administrative Services, and Rich Labors, deputy commissioner at New Hampshire Employment Security, described operational steps: the state offered coverage to state employees as the statutory baseline, the program included employer‑sponsored and individual pools, and open enrollment windows for individuals ran annually. Labors said 308 employers had elected to sponsor coverage and an individual purchase option is available for workers whose employers do not participate. He said many of the individual purchasers are young women buying bonding leave benefits for newborns.

Speakers from small nonprofit employers and town governments — including Laura Milliken of New Hampshire Hunger Solutions and Nancy Glynn, a selectboard member — told the committee the program is important to recruitment and retention and that the cost to small employers or municipalities to participate has been modest. “We are able to hire and retain employees because we can offer a competitive benefits package,” said Laura Milliken; she said her nonprofit pays the premium for all employees and has used the program for employees with childbirth or family‑care needs.

Witnesses opposing repeal also included MomsRising, the New Hampshire Women’s Foundation and healthcare and workforce groups, who urged the committee to consider improvements and expansion rather than repeal.

Turcotte argued the program created an ongoing taxpayer obligation because the state paid premiums for state employees; opponents said the state‑funded employee pool was a deliberate design choice to seed a voluntary market and was essential to offering affordable coverage to individuals and small employers.

The committee closed the public hearing after extensive questioning from members and testimony from agency officials and community groups. Committee members said they would study the program’s enrollment, fiscal impact and market dynamics in follow‑up work before making a policy decision.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Commerce and Consumer Affairs (02/19/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Lehi Turcotte asked the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee to repeal New Hampshire’s paid family and medical leave program, arguing the state’s taxpayer‑paid baseline for state employees turned a voluntary program into a taxpayer expense.","taxTitle","Commerce and Consumer Affairs, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17743,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682193,"Sponsor urges gold‑and‑silver legal‑tender bill as hedge; state groups and businesses urge caution",2460,9495000,11955000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d&start=9495&end=11955","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d/thumbnail_9495000.jpg","/articles/6682193/New-Hampshire/Sponsor-urges-goldandsilver-legaltender-bill-as-hedge-state-groups-and-businesses-urge-caution","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682193-3831017b256169bfd528fc9a587c5386/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178587&Signature=pAqvdcVUAi5hHmboXFaj5Xh4ImU39~8i9VzAK9PEYl~ghtZBLDqfg~pDdnnsr6Qwl4SGVwbK0FpQrwDsLEOGEFZ6000P1U6eNa9miezaglu30Qy0T8HY425PCWeOzitb0utWPSA3hFVEtmfP93dN3P1mNuNeYaavFB6XYjTJhPzTsH35GXz9hCI93HFUO1hY~4L6E2WzB7oVodm9rR7GG5KnXje7v9COwZ1ykN-~2wTpAttpGxRLWvJQoiiJoXSokRET~XTOk3T7PljlpsCamfOJKlylAVfXGH4V6BtlLiwOca3FVs1C8lKYKQeIQBSAnb1YLL9SJfNsmCZuyYwfJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Juliet Harvey Bolia told the Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee she introduced House Bill 721 to classify gold and silver as legal tender in New Hampshire, describing the measure as a bipartisan way to offer residents an alternative store of value and a hedge against inflation and emerging central bank digital currencies.

“This is a bipartisan economic‑justice bill,” Rep. Juliet Harvey Bolia said. She told the committee the bill would let residents transact in gold and silver via contemporary platforms — phone apps and cards that let customers spend a gold‑backed balance — and said she envisions carve‑outs if the state ever adopted a sales tax.

Harvey Bolia cited examples from other states, including Utah and Florida, where legislative measures and studies have created state depositories or defined treatment of precious metals in state law. She described modern tools — custodial accounts and cards linked to gold reserves — that make spending small amounts of gold or silver practical.

But municipal and business groups urged caution. S. Robert Cohen of the New Hampshire Municipal Association told the committee that if gold or silver become legal tender, towns could be forced to accept coins or bars at town offices and would be unprepared to secure, verify and convert them. “Municipalities aren’t set up for security for gold and silver, nor are they set up to be metallurgists,” Cohen said.

Natch Grama of the Business and Industry Association warned that businesses that operate across state lines would be forced to convert gold‑or‑silver payments into dollars to meet payroll and supplier obligations. She said the uncertainty over conversion and whether small retail purchases would be treated as taxable transactions creates a compliance burden for enterprises doing interstate commerce.

Others questioned how the measure would interact with federal tax rules; Rep. Sullivan pressed whether private transactions in gold or silver are already lawful and whether state recognition would change federal tax consequences. Representatives noted existing apps that let customers spend precious metals balances through familiar card networks.

Several committee members said the bill deserves subcommittee study to refine definitions and address practical questions about municipal acceptance, taxation, private custody and anti‑money‑laundering safeguards. The sponsor agreed the measure could be narrowed or amended to address municipal, enforcement and taxation concerns.

Ending: The committee closed the public hearing and signaled it will likely refer the bill to subcommittee to work through technical issues including municipal operations, tax treatment and whether the state should create any custody or depository mechanisms.","Representative Juliet Harvey Bolia told the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee that House Bill 721 would declare gold and silver legal tender and protect small transactions using precious metals as a hedge against inflation and new payment technologies.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682187,"Bill would require items labeled “compostable” meet commercial‑composting testing standards, sponsor says",711,13135000,13846000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d&start=13135&end=13846","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d/thumbnail_13135000.jpg","/articles/6682187/New-Hampshire/Bill-would-require-items-labeled-compostable-meet-commercialcomposting-testing-standards-sponsor-says","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682187-b5c6dc83928608c209731b5a3515f1a3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178587&Signature=dJWRe5WfnIfiV1x6QLk9k6fWGa1OkXy~VMlVlk~BaXErOIxr87GmfeZ-5VxMKIsA~fKf6Js77QPY2QC62sMsJCscVc9cYWlOmDtuK-aOLsvBG9gp2vC4GojnMrkONiDxFBKezSxpU924chLFCW9RJ5Qngr3Hp8AIIJ-PKF5tffKypJLeRsPemQD328UkREBE91ySHs3nf2WFENMUhqE~fFm~Vr4Fcc3jGADPOtrryN6xy2Z5xxlunJ4E4bPxUEimUFYc8ofKetQGN2XG0lG94nut37cRsuDrKx5SuoH84Sy07JotVTa19NZ6aTIMsGg5CdqqCnTaYp5-t5hlpqHd7A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Lucius Parshall told the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee HB 556 is a “truth‑in‑advertising” bill that would require products labeled as “compostable” to meet established third‑party testing standards — for example ASTM protocols and Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) certification — before they can be marketed as compostable in New Hampshire.

Parshall said the state’s growing organic waste stream and the limited number of commercial composting facilities mean consumers and municipalities are harmed when products are mislabeled or promoted as compostable but do not break down in commercial facilities. “This is not a ban on foam cups or plastic bags,” he said. “It’s a language bill. If you call something compostable in New Hampshire, it should meet verifiable standards.”

The bill would define “compostable” to mean a product that has been independently tested and verified to break down in a commercial composting facility under recognized standards — the ASTM standards noted in sponsor testimony — and it would place the labeling prohibition into an appropriate consumer protection or commerce statute.

Michael Nork of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services told the committee DES had discussed placement of the bill’s provisions with the sponsor and suggested moving enforcement language into the state’s consumer protection or trade statute rather than the disposal‑oriented chapter where the bill was intro duced. Nork said DES could enforce provisions if placed under the disposal statute but that consumer‑protection placement would more naturally allow the Attorney General’s office or Department of Justice to handle mislabeling complaints.

Representatives asked whether the bill covered product packaging and serviceware; the sponsor replied the standards cited govern serviceware used by food vendors and clarified the intent is to target labels on products marketed as compostable. Nork and the sponsor discussed ASTM test references and the two agreed the bill should refer to third‑party certification standards rather than attempt to replicate technical test language in statute.

Ending: Committee members said the bill raises straightforward consumer‑protection questions but that placement in statute and enforcement authority need to be clarified; the committee will likely refer the measure to subcommittee for technical drafting and to resolve where enforcement belongs.","Representative Lucius Parshall told the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee House Bill 556 would make it unlawful to label products “compostable” in New Hampshire unless they meet recognized third‑party testing standards such as ASTM protocols and BPI certification.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6682198,"Committee hears bill to shorten enforcement window for old mortgages, sponsors cite consumer harms",187,441000,628000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d&start=441&end=628","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2347753-271b71edb11ab1d213b4238e20b3e15d/thumbnail_441000.jpg","/articles/6682198/New-Hampshire/Committee-hears-bill-to-shorten-enforcement-window-for-old-mortgages-sponsors-cite-consumer-harms","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6682198-4d2fd8ef5ebf8a94ed013a124aab3b7c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178587&Signature=SIoaEe2uGQcNQCC-XATS8Ky11Hoq2eHxCtGUtoxsiEjyQeADjaIlM0m1iBVePlwEtUwvwv3mCxBCN2eZ6T5vtFLCD-f2v2xsvVtLtA-7V2Zx~WHaq9M~~Ni1J2bKtN8~xvia0c1J6tmPahQvHVKM1KFAVEO3nyha5ci7QmWHJYWt9oe5ivX3vO3ezCdvttjYbekOHlIugGMio1K~hQoC3yxphJcbyr2e5AF4GVxF94oB3eWxDVtCFNv5uA5svd06p4dcDXCYyofPoNEIUgtHrPOGQQwKc4Ak2nhZvbjt5P6HUIa~0EJKJiNSfA1DS7CTSietHdtLybDon2jwq2y3eA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 437 would shorten the time that certain recorded mortgages remain enforceable and create a statutory process for clearing obsolete liens, Rep. Bill Boyd told the House Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee.

Supporters including the bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Bill Boyd, and cosponsors said the change would help conveyancers, title insurers and homeowners by reducing the number of “undischarged mortgages” that linger in county registries long after lenders stop servicing a loan.

“This is a consumer bill,” Rep. Bill Boyd said. “It’s going to provide a necessary remedy to consumers and attorneys and conveyancers that have had this particular problem with obsolete mortgages.” Boyd said the proposal follows models in other states — notably Massachusetts — and would void mortgages five years after a stated maturity date and make mortgages without a maturity date unenforceable 35 years after recording.

Mary Hacken‑Phillips, a real estate attorney and cosponsor, told the committee that title defects from old, unreleased mortgages often force homeowners or buyers to hire attorneys and file quiet‑title actions to clear titles. “These court cases take several months and thousands of dollars to complete,” Hacken‑Phillips said. She described the proposed statutory procedure as a less costly, faster alternative to repeated court petitions.

Industry witnesses described working with the bill sponsor during drafting. Ryan Hale, vice‑president for government relations at the New Hampshire Bankers Association, said his members reviewed the language and recommended an effective date delay to give lenders time to update recordkeeping; the bill’s draft includes a delayed effective date at a banker request.

Title‑insurance underwriter Michelle Rady Coffin and Susan Cole, president of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, told the committee they see frequent examples of mortgages that were paid but never properly discharged in the public record, causing cancelled sales and extra legal costs. Coffin said quiet‑title lawsuits can cost $8,000–$10,000 in some cases and that an administrative statutory path would reduce those burdens.

Committee members asked whether mortgage holders would receive additional notice before a mortgage became unenforceable. Rep. Peter asked whether the bill requires sending individual notices to mortgage holders; sponsors and proponents replied that New Hampshire is a “notice” recording state and that the statute would rely on recorded notices at the county registry rather than require new direct mail notice to lenders. Boyd and others said the bill would place an onus on lenders to renew recordings or lose enforcement rights, but they acknowledged industry governance questions about reassigned loans and lenders that are out of business.

What’s next: The committee took testimony and questioned multiple witnesses; no formal action or vote was recorded at the hearing. If the committee moves the bill forward, the language and the bill’s effective date will likely be discussed further to address lender operational concerns and county recording mechanics.

Ending: Supporters said HB 437 would reduce court dockets and title‑related transaction costs by creating a clearer, statutory path to clear obsolete liens; banks asked for implementation time and technical adjustments to ensure the recording system and reassignment chains are handled fairly.","Lawmakers and industry witnesses told the Commerce & Consumer Affairs Committee that House Bill 437 would make long‑recorded, undischarged mortgages unenforceable sooner and cut court time and title work. Supporters framed the bill as consumer protection; bankers and some lawmakers pressed on notice and implementation details.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Supporters and opponents spar as committee hears bill to repeal state paid family and medical leave

Sponsor urges gold‑and‑silver legal‑tender bill as hedge; state groups and businesses urge caution

Bill would require items labeled “compostable” meet commercial‑composting testing standards, sponsor says

Committee hears bill to shorten enforcement window for old mortgages, sponsors cite consumer harms