[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-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",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_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",6611370,"mediaKeyId","2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e","parentId",2897452,"title","Lengthy public hearing on House Bill 649 exposes deep split over New Hampshire vehicle inspection program","audioSeconds",4013,"startMs",1943000,"endMs",5956000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e&start=1943&end=5956","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e/thumbnail_1943000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6611370/New-Hampshire/Lengthy-public-hearing-on-House-Bill-649-exposes-deep-split-over-New-Hampshire-vehicle-inspection-program","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611370-3a8879dc3e905be807b594b4868aadeb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170606&Signature=MaX1tmM3gYc8JSk02vGv6lIJZFVUVWvgfLjd13~05TQvV57InIFHgGwl505boZUh3JzbzAFOVt6fcBSEY~2wGz4tzWQtOzGoJM50AYHD-caebw1hQB7sTD1YTQ24EhDLwKiRNsgK6i5cz~kl7UohRhD-VMGCD6ccGHt~6V5lB-PHvLbml5hqBDIPBn8pg1efYM5ve~h2tGqa-CKq050iodeqAcAA9yUpc3BsAA1FEr94yICpV~BSqe36wdYS5DoWoigc6BxStK0o8MmyUlcBsLumngLWupcior7sq~RDbOBhxLKPYaczSurLq2SkDj5nnIKEqd3aPbyASdKKHjIM5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-04-08T15:45:43.643Z","article","A long public hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee produced sharply divided testimony on House Bill 649, the proposal that would scale back or eliminate the state’s mandatory vehicle inspection program.

The hearing featured roughly two dozen witnesses representing a wide range of perspectives — independent technicians and inspection station operators who defended the program as protecting safety and limiting emissions, tow‑truck drivers and first responders who warned of mechanically unsafe vehicles on the road, and members of the public and small‑business owners who called the inspection regime costly, inconsistent and prone to abuse.

Proponents of repeal or major change told the committee the inspection program is anachronistic and imposes undue costs on lower‑income drivers and small businesses. Representative public testimony included reports of large out‑of‑pocket repair bills for inspection failures that speakers said were the result of confusing or overly broad failure criteria. Several witnesses — including speakers who identified themselves as small‑business owners and residents — said they found inconsistent results among inspection stations and gave examples of substantial repair quotes for issues others later said were minor.

Opponents — including long‑time licensed technicians and inspection station operators — argued the program prevents dangerous vehicles from circulating, protects the environment through emissions enforcement and provides a professional standard that troopers or roadside stops cannot replicate. David DuPont, a former shop owner and licensed inspector, told the committee: \"The check engine light is more than just a light. It's telling you that the vehicle is polluting more, is telling you that the consumer is not getting optimal fuel economy and the vehicle emissions most likely are out of compliance.\" DuPont also warned that eliminating motorcycle inspections could be deadly.

Neil Trindade, who identified himself as the owner of Neil's Laconia Garage, said the program's requirements and broad diagnostic codes have degraded the trade and impose burdens on technicians and owners. \"I believe time, technology, and bureaucracy have made this program unmanageable, unnecessary, and an unjustifiable burden to the people of the state,\" Trindade said.

Several witnesses described personal anecdotes to underscore both practical and equity issues: a constituent who drove hours between a dealership and an inspection station because of a software update, a landscaper who spent retirement or 401(k) funds to fix a truck so it could be inspected, and an owner of a towing service who described the hazard of loading vehicles with broken components on high‑speed highways. A tow operator explained why removing inspections could reduce the chance of detecting dangerous failures before they cause roadside breakdowns.

Speakers on both sides asked the committee for targeted changes rather than wholesale repeal. Those favoring retention urged modernization of administrative rules (for example, clarifying what constitutes structural rust versus cosmetic corrosion) and better enforcement of fraudulent or predatory inspection station practices. Those favoring repeal asked whether the market could provide inspection‑equivalent checks alongside private maintenance and noted other states without mandatory annual inspections.

Committee procedure and next steps: The committee heard more than two dozen speakers in total, closed the public hearing on HB 649 and moved on to other bills. No committee vote to advance or defeat HB 649 was recorded in the hearing transcript; the hearing record will be part of the committee file and may be used by staff and members drafting amendments or later motions.

Why it matters: The vehicle inspection program covers millions of inspections per year and affects drivers across income levels and vehicle types, including newer electric vehicles that some witnesses said mechanics are reluctant to service. Changes to the program would affect consumer costs, environmental enforcement and the structure of the inspection market.

Provenance (selected): committee hearing record for House Bill 649, opening remarks and public testimony.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Commerce (04/08/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","A public hearing on House Bill 649 drew broad, sharply divided testimony from vehicle owners, inspection technicians, tow operators and others about whether New Hampshire’s mandatory vehicle inspection program should be scaled back or ended.","taxTitle","Judiciary, Senate , Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",29511,"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},6611375,"Senate Commerce Committee advances several 'homestead food' bills in executive session",872,144000,1016000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e&start=144&end=1016","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e/thumbnail_144000.jpg","/articles/6611375/New-Hampshire/Senate-Commerce-Committee-advances-several-homestead-food-bills-in-executive-session","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611375-6a82620e2fc8f11d8fa9c3dc86f02aba/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170606&Signature=VoteZuVieelBG~NbJQO2o9pDIXdg8lZOPmwptH0FWyHJ4M14VEvfiBF2M2XX6niCXS9v4miYlaFqGMawNiLlB8fDpzswOUvkVhPnLKY3e6Uv3suC5mdnX~jmRZ7HVS6f1P96cTUH7TsxUmASuM-9DAapVHkVO5YWICR4z7dQlv~TI2-6PYrTMlpAj5-seDDqZRBGDhVmIDLFYneFT8bPwWPL~HOfYqFknL13ebFnDaIFIL8rfawlJA7cIbbkEf9IWvn4I17MpzV3BJzF2MLgcReBKj-QvvqoEz7VViJCnfOgIExAKFtUlkXrKgCtoScHeD3azpMWf7DcTALTeAoEqQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Commerce Committee, meeting in executive session, voted on a package of homestead food operation bills that define allowable equipment, labeling, and related provisions.

Committee leadership said they intended to act on six bills in the session, beginning with House Bill 98. The committee recorded an \"ought to pass\" recommendation for HB 98 after a motion and second; no public discussion was reported on the transcript for that bill.

Members spent most discussion time on House Bill 150, which defines commercial kitchen equipment for homestead food operations. Senator Ricciardi and others said the cottage industry has expanded in New Hampshire and that operators sought clarification after a Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) FAQ previously included a one‑word prohibition that raised uncertainty. Some committee members pushed back, arguing the Senate need not regulate equipment lists and that existing state law may already allow such equipment. After debate the committee voted the bill out with an \"ought to pass\" motion; the transcript records the committee vote on HB 150 as 4 to 1, and the item was placed on consent for the next floor action.

The committee also took \"ought to pass\" action on House Bills 279, 304, 307 and a bill expanding the definition of an occasional restaurant (referred to in the hearing as House Bill 3701/371 in different turns). The committee characterized several of the measures as clarifying or minor: HB 279 and HB 304 were described as clarifying recipes and labeling requirements (including allergen concerns), with HB 304 referenced specifically as a health and safety measure. Most of these passed on consent or after short discussion; a handful of members volunteered to \"take out\" or carry particular bills for floor consideration (for instance, Senator Reardon and Senator Beshardi volunteered to handle certain bills).

Committee members also noted one bill (HB 225) would be held to permit an amendment to be drafted and circulated before the committee acts.

Why it matters: The package is intended to reduce uncertainty for small-scale, home‑based food producers by clarifying equipment and labeling rules and by updating limited operational definitions. Some senators voiced concern about precedent-setting and urged caution about expanding statutory detail for niche industries. Several members framed the bills as resolving a specific regulatory ambiguity created by the department's FAQ rather than imposing new blanket mandates.

Votes at a glance (committee-level actions recorded in transcript):
- House Bill 98 — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved (motion/second recorded; no roll call in transcript). Notes: moved and seconded in executive session.
- House Bill 150 — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved; committee vote recorded as 4 yes, 1 no; placed on consent.
- House Bill 279 — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved on consent; a senator (Reardon) volunteered to \"take out\" for floor handling.
- House Bill 304 — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved on consent; described in discussion as addressing labeling/allergen safety.
- House Bill 307 — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved on consent.
- House Bill 3701 (referred to as an \"occasional restaurant\" expansion) — Motion: \"ought to pass\"; outcome: approved on consent.

The committee exited executive session and recessed, then returned to public hearings on other bills later in the agenda.

Sources and evidence: Committee transcript of the executive session and subsequent motions as recorded in the committee's meeting record.","In an executive session the Senate Commerce Committee voted ought-to-pass or placed on consent multiple bills that adjust definitions and requirements for homestead food operations, including equipment and labeling rules. One bill (HB 150) drew a recorded 4–1 vote on the floor of the committee; most others were approved on consent.",{"_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},6611354,"Sponsor returns with revised brewpub distribution language for committee consideration",292,7899000,8191000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e&start=7899&end=8191","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e/thumbnail_7899000.jpg","/articles/6611354/New-Hampshire/Sponsor-returns-with-revised-brewpub-distribution-language-for-committee-consideration","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611354-675a47072135b97a75236e46ef102313/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170606&Signature=Yu9X7Bhcww07f9XPM1uaC4OS5A5SDRGa5wHy~ABcX0iHWe8N7QbyN4ZSh57vsK-CaizjuICXuvvW2nyctNUEqu~JQF3lMm3C~GS67OsPgby29Qa1DOEORp0cqGrk0vrWSReQ960Ni1X-NWN0ONDUdzoBVJ~YPNS4GryDue7CfN8z6lU1uF8GpeIouw97xy6zBpd8aOaXTPq-L0-tsrRANvOkjXY1n1CrifXjzF7~Ziio5sLRg2sz8eY99I4Fsj-2ujCVerUg0TukzqYXdx11dyLJK4A~L9~28VGhItunptUaqAApz0Vq3uV59A6WhZb3zEbxDdTkc~qH2zHpak~oWA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative John Hunt appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee to present House Bill 242, a measure addressing the distribution rights of brewpubs and production caps. Hunt described the bill as intended to preserve elements of the \"three‑tier\" liquor distribution system while allowing limited brewery production and intra‑company sales within statutory caps.

Hunt said the version presented aligns with language that the Senate approved in a prior session but that a non‑germane commerce amendment had been attached in the subsequent process; the sponsor said the attached material complicated the measure and he wants the committee to consider the restored language. The sponsor characterized brewpubs as a business model that historically sat at the edge of the three‑tier system and said the present bill simply clarifies that limited production may be distributed within specified caps and limits.

No additional public testimony was recorded on the bill during this hearing; the committee closed the hearing. The transcript shows no committee vote or formal action at the session.

Why it matters: The bill would affect craft brewers and restaurant owners who produce beer on site and could change whether and how brewpub beer is distributed to other affiliated restaurants or outlets. The measure touches on established three‑tier distribution statutes and has been the subject of prior floor debate.","Representative John Hunt presented a refiled or reworked bill concerning distribution of beer produced by brewpubs and caps on production. The sponsor said the measure restores language that had passed the Senate previously; the committee heard from no additional public witnesses at this hearing.",{"_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},6611359,"Insurance department seeks statutory clean‑up, new notification duties and higher minimum capitalization for insurers",311,7222000,7533000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e&start=7222&end=7533","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e/thumbnail_7222000.jpg","/articles/6611359/New-Hampshire/Insurance-department-seeks-statutory-cleanup-new-notification-duties-and-higher-minimum-capitalization-for-insurers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611359-02589e8af3a34130eb99cca36f10a9d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170606&Signature=e81cP0P2GEltowQJyRyygGDAmnWiy0ohT3oN5f9DhTpx6rpXd2asiSG50s4LY-PcV0J3QgAF8jsBKqKE34L276dPNla1bFVIyTwnPktt1IRuguvq~esqIjG7qMS8t~vKaENEEoKNE1kfs6-fF1Ay4Y-92Q3-gnvDY7Fk7eqsw1U9Z7U~UcAQ1fpQguZfDItviNmXlC2jAwiGD3QhQZuOCEKbCAFALLzHA5zwa59IUrJK81VMLYBQQ~IhAEApWQqsx-wfApEiqlAKqTc4FJ9DRD1GjvNSjZvIkRsIF7tQklwnjHhrT1bv~7MYdmYd~5aZtGMG-V-gHhlXytwpmNyhUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The New Hampshire Insurance Department told the Senate Commerce Committee that House Bill 499 is a technical and modernization package that updates statute language, aligns state law with federal requirements and adds a carrier notification duty for material line‑withdrawals.

Commissioner D.J. Betancourt summarized the bill as part of an ongoing review of insurance statutes. The measure would: (1) amend language to align the state's independent dispute resolution and balance‑billing rules with the federal No Surprises Act, (2) require carriers to notify the department before discontinuing lines of business (a change motivated by recent Medicare Advantage market exits), (3) clarify investigative authority and regulatory reach over unadmitted surplus lines, and (4) raise the minimum required capital for entities seeking to form as domestic insurers (the draft increases a low‑end threshold from about $800,000 to $3,000,000 to filter out non‑serious proposals while preserving New Hampshire's market‑friendly posture).

Deputy Commissioner Michelle Heaton and property/casualty counsel Emily Doherty described operational details: the carrier notification requirement is intended to help the department and consumers track and respond to sudden market withdrawals; the surplus‑lines clarifications ensure investigative authority applies uniformly; and the financial threshold change reflects the department's experience reviewing many speculative or undercapitalized applications.

Committee members asked about comparative thresholds, insolvency risk and the department's experience; the department said the changes were not intended to inhibit new domestic formations but to reduce administrative burden from unworkable proposals. The department also noted New Hampshire has not experienced a domestic insurer insolvency in decades and maintains financial supervision and a guarantee fund as backstops.

Why it matters: These are housekeeping and modernization changes for insurance regulation with potential downstream effects on market notices, consumer protection and the state's ability to manage market exits and company formations.

Committee procedure: The committee heard the department's presentation and closed the hearing; no committee vote was recorded on the transcript at the time of the session.","The Insurance Department described a set of technical and programmatic changes in House Bill 499: aligning state law with the federal No Surprises Act implementation, requiring insurers to notify the department before major market withdrawals, clarifying surplus‑lines authority and raising minimum capital thresholds for domestic insurers.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6611365,"Sponsor and Secretary of State back bill to speed removal of fraudulent business registrations",1109,6067000,7176000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e&start=6067&end=7176","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2897452-7ee06f36937f8b31e116f719325b960e/thumbnail_6067000.jpg","/articles/6611365/New-Hampshire/Sponsor-and-Secretary-of-State-back-bill-to-speed-removal-of-fraudulent-business-registrations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6611365-a020c2bcec1899946609296f0ffb6519/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170606&Signature=exSzJu4MqLR9r2aY4DhR3Y-KSMAowcvhLbkSXBwlI7sB7KEiURJ4HYDMtGN2kY7lzqifSQusUDIhPdi7oyHUr5igjYqlaS192leWVm7zdjzTU6ca5UpCzzqrD0qOKJECdmQOcjwS~mojryh1Ba2R9G4TtFaGoKwF4nWs47ra-g82eoDTD1Nvvk8E2RiK1Ut5w0PhporCpbsK88zG1AaaxgSkej9T0SRaesh3yoLuqYouBreeXNPI2VHlMeRxemPUWMsa3JBXne8Gsn03g3edL4lW~rp-YaXBv670t3MwrK4yFrePcnpIrPCuSG47GlLUswJb-pIYptbZFcmxz2TEtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Luz Bey told the Senate Commerce Committee that House Bill 406 responds to a string of fraudulent business filings that used names and addresses similar to established local restaurants. Bey described two incidents in which newly created entities used an existing restaurant's address; in one case, the restaurant owner later received credit card mailings addressed to the fraudulent entity.

Bey said she worked with the Secretary of State's corporations director to document the events. Under current practice, the office sends a registered letter to the listed address; if returned as undeliverable, the office can mark the entity not in good standing and — after the statutorily required timeline — administratively dissolve it. Bey said the timeline allowed perpetrators time to open bank accounts and otherwise use the registration to commit financial fraud before the entity could be dissolved.

Deputy Secretary of State Erin Hennessy and Tom Connolly, the corporations division leader, briefed the committee on the office's experience and the intended change. Connolly described two common fraud patterns: \"synthetic entity\" filings that mix real and fake information to create an apparently legitimate business, and \"company hijacking\" where malicious filers replace or insert names so a public record appears to show different principals. The Secretary of State's office said it has been manually marking suspicious filings not in good standing and administratively dissolving them, but that a statutory tool would let staff take faster action.

Connolly said the office is preparing to replace its online filings system and to incorporate data analysis and vendor verification tools that could flag suspicious filings (for example, repeated use of the same IP address or mailing address across multiple suspicious filings). He asked the committee to adopt HB 406 so the office could act more quickly to block fraudulent filings and reduce harms to small business owners.

Why it matters: Business registration is a public record used by banks and other commercial actors to verify entities; fraudulent filings that mimic existing businesses can enable identity theft, unauthorized credit lines and other financial harms. The bill is narrow and directed at administrative remedies and verification tools rather than criminal penalties.

Committee procedure: The committee took testimony from the bill sponsor and from Secretary of State staff and then closed the hearing; no committee vote was recorded in the transcript at the time of the hearing.

Provenance: committee hearing record for HB 406.","Representative Luz Bey, speaking for HB 406, said fraudulent filings that mimic local restaurants led to bank accounts and credit cards being opened; the Secretary of State's office described administrative steps it already uses and supported statutory changes to allow faster removal of fraudulent filings.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Lengthy public hearing on House Bill 649 exposes deep split over New Hampshire vehicle inspection program

Senate Commerce Committee advances several 'homestead food' bills in executive session

Sponsor returns with revised brewpub distribution language for committee consideration

Insurance department seeks statutory clean‑up, new notification duties and higher minimum capitalization for insurers

Sponsor and Secretary of State back bill to speed removal of fraudulent business registrations