[{"_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",6086141,"mediaKeyId","2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90","parentId",2899283,"title","House plan trims Division 1: cuts, board consolidations and retirement changes","audioSeconds",278,"startMs",1748000,"endMs",2026000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90&start=1748&end=2026","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90/thumbnail_1748000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6086141/New-Hampshire/House-plan-trims-Division-1-cuts-board-consolidations-and-retirement-changes","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6086141-434067c6f1cb0e4dcc3369492639723b/orig.mp4?Expires=1776086166&Signature=o8T8EDzcSaX0TaqDQGHQgnIm69SQkkh0UnJpXKxzDB6gRcJTy3Gp5DHGL4MTQj7vS~iU8xHrqEHiy59UX5-04rXPiPcddr~VG9bqkMixISsV6ybNAopVqBcVJ-UmWeCDFb9LrYd2g-iiWjVfcCBGCohJaWaddAT2OJQPMIlDQlytdyHIXRh7IuaU2xRtOAaBg-u8BfwIyCOjqh6rSxYrakbadY8XRaLPGaPgQVyKZDQFU0TgkiBedG7Hr9-QKQWmLfggqOUi407x0WoU3fpFH1tErl8Fg0M1rKvvTizLzuPO18DwUmIJz2piZJYe4mxwvJKSsEdLOcKhCEAnZufZjA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-04-03T20:02:57Z","article","Lawmakers overseeing Division 1 described a series of administrative and programmatic reductions intended to find savings across smaller agencies and commissions.

The House presentation said Division 1 includes dozens of smaller agencies and that the committee used a combination of targeted eliminations, consolidation of administrative functions and “back-of-budget” percentage reductions to achieve savings. Items cited included the elimination of the Commission on Aging, consolidation of the Public Employee Labor Relations Board, the Personnel Appeals Board and a Right to Know ombudsman into a single administrative staff, elimination of the Office of the Child Advocate, and reduced appropriations for the Secretary of State and Department of Justice in certain lines.

Committee members described a mix of administrative efficiencies (shared staff for quasi‑judicial boards), fee increases in areas such as agriculture and licensing, and one-time savings from delaying maintenance or decommissioning properties. The committee also described changes to the state retirement system: holding administrative expenses flat, committing general funds to shore up Group 2 (corrections, police, fire) retirement improvements, and authorizing a defined-contribution option for newly hired state employees intended to provide a portable benefit for workers who do not vest under the traditional defined-benefit plan.

On quasi-judicial boards, committee leaders said they eliminated or folded smaller appeals boards and commissions (for example, the Board of Tax and Land Appeals, Housing Appeals Board and Human Rights Commission) and proposed that affected appeals be litigated in superior court, sometimes without the lower-fee administrative option that those boards provided. Critics at the hearing warned that moving appeals to superior court could raise costs and intimidate some low-income claimants, shifting the burden to taxpayers and residents.

The presenter said some savings came from identifying funded but vacant positions and eliminating those authorizations—particularly long-standing vacancies where payroll records showed positions not actively paid. The committee also removed or deferred some advertising and program outreach lines (for example, pausing paid-family-leave advertising) and asked large IT and administrative departments to take modest percentage reductions compared with the governor’s requests.

Committee members repeatedly characterized these as difficult choices intended to prioritize direct care and core services while removing peripheral boards and duplicative administrative spending.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Finance Committee Budget Briefing (04/08/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Lawmakers overseeing Division 1 described a series of administrative and programmatic reductions intended to find savings across smaller agencies and commissions.","taxTitle","Finance, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17749,"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},6086145,"House finance panel presents $16.27 billion biennial budget; general fund is small share of total",407,565000,972000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90&start=565&end=972","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90/thumbnail_565000.jpg","/articles/6086145/New-Hampshire/House-finance-panel-presents-1627-billion-biennial-budget-general-fund-is-small-share-of-total","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6086145-02ef53db4d26bc71f8d1323e0acf4175/orig.mp4?Expires=1776086166&Signature=K4k39Tp5s3Fejy028d~g47kT6inEsjmTXiltXF5ZmBJxBisTamIvH8BDsxoyRFhpd-h7k~HdIzLfGGlYlyM4U2aRHxWwseDY1lERakFt9oA0ZExkNh23VJ-CGLYgJwAn7Lx-eHKHTqnSoo8Y2tOMj94i2YaYcPZZyeyroer1bTTZ9vGIRjFY3oxawyerCWXu29nhWkygNbPiXRpnjA-QhkJR04QYmoZO9O0dP3ph6llxDPhRZcbo89BtyGSesaHtLDeFhTzEr5coGPIEiSsJWu4ai9lwbCKAJ8dKTRnLYRQpJDSDexH7qxFwBq5ZB7Kl-GTBa0nNKPG~M9DKI3k0uA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Finance Committee presented a proposed $16,267,016,000 biennial budget that committee members said balances priorities while responding to a revenue shortfall.

Committee leaders told members the total-budget figure is roughly $16.27 billion, down from the governor’s $16.7 billion starting point. They said federal funding accounts for about one-third of the total budget while the general fund represents approximately 24% of revenues; health and human services and education remain the largest program categories.

Committee members framed the package as a constrained compromise. The presentation emphasized that the general fund, which pays for programs most affected by state tax policy, is a relatively small slice of the state’s total spending but a critical control point for program priorities. Members noted the budget must address a current-year shortfall the committee expects to be roughly $150 million and that the state’s “rainy day” balance will decline unless revenue or spending decisions change.

To close the gap, committee leaders said they combined targeted reductions, “back-of-budget” management cuts that ask agencies to find savings, fee increases tied to user services (for example vehicle registration and licensing), and limited asset sales. They also described structural changes to several dedicated funds and to the distribution of trust-account revenues.

The committee repeatedly emphasized that the budget priorities preserved direct patient care, core public safety responsibilities and commitments to veterans and developmental-disability services while reducing other statutory and discretionary spending. Members said the package is intended as the House position to send to the Senate, and that the Senate may revise revenue or rate decisions before final passage.

The plan does not record roll-call votes in the transcript of the hearing; committee members and attendees asked numerous procedural and substantive questions during the multi-hour presentation. The panel’s leaders said they expected follow-up review and possible adjustments in the Senate and through fiscal committee mechanisms during the biennium.","The House finance committee outlined a $16.267 billion total budget, with roughly 24% sourced from the general fund and federal funds providing about one-third of revenues; members said the plan required cuts and fee increases to close an expected shortfall.",{"_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},6086130,"House budget cuts Medicaid rates, pauses family‑planning funding and prioritizes direct care at DHHS",450,11945000,12395000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90&start=11945&end=12395","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90/thumbnail_11945000.jpg","/articles/6086130/New-Hampshire/House-budget-cuts-Medicaid-rates-pauses-familyplanning-funding-and-prioritizes-direct-care-at-DHHS","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6086130-803ce9d0206229e64ea0115cbb9358f0/orig.mp4?Expires=1776086166&Signature=FqKADijQ~K-hv3guRw6V0Eqfg0dHEXCJ6ZWrRpvCEp039qzG~9yqEZSRSVk2e0a6NAP6dpBUpYVzN69IBw0g5FncFYft~p5EUE8zl~p8vUqLmZsBqU2fptsgMxRS-7bmXlg3sjLf3qSl9G-yV02CKRa9Wm9Yttfnjyd166Zx0vAb~mVqQvFHB-Wv~skNC83MZLQR5SiQaiMNxngBu80a7URcDzoMVdWvaWB04PdlkPuOi8hg8uKP-4jcKpr~epX6VV01pk3WW3UQyyj~8uOaQW-nqfTugRnVd8kg-IEGMMDYZgpXSSbZoFFxrC5qKqw2dU0LxJZkiW1JxMtxlUHdng__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Finance’s Division 3 presentation focused on the Department of Health and Human Services and described substantial general‑fund reductions—roughly 10% in the first-year allocation for the division—and a mix of program protections and cuts designed to preserve direct patient care.

Division 3 leaders said the committee prioritized direct-service obligations—state-run hospitals, the Veterans Home, the Glencliff residential facility and the youth development center—and that the budget therefore preserved core staffing for corrections officers and other front-line positions while reducing administrative and nonessential lines. To close the revenue gap, the committee included several revenue-generation and cost-control measures: a 3% across‑the‑board Medicaid rate reduction, increased efforts to pursue Medicaid recoveries from estates, a small co‑pay for higher‑income Medicaid enrollees, fee increases in regulatory programs, and the sale or partial disposal of certain state properties (the Philbrook property, a Manchester house with remediation needs and surplus Hampstead campus parcels).

The presentation said family-planning grants that had supported four federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) and clinics would be zeroed out in the House package. Committee presenters described the elimination as a painful choice driven by tight general-fund limits; several public commenters and committee members urged maintaining funding for geographically remote clinics or otherwise protecting sexual and reproductive health services for low‑income residents.

On developmental-disability services, the committee funded increases for children’s in‑home supports, added money for acquired brain-disorder services and moved to cover certain previously unspent administrative balances to reduce pressure on provider contracts. Lawmakers also highlighted a funding restoration for Glencliff, where the committee said earlier budgeting had omitted necessary contract/personnel flexibility and that a significant correction was required to keep the residential facility operational.

Committee presenters said the most regrettable single directive was the 3% Medicaid rate reduction and that they hoped the Senate would revisit it; they flagged the cut as the item they would most like to change. The division also reallocated some liquor fund deposits and opioid‑abatement funds and eliminated the Prescription Drug Affordability Board funding to redirect limited general funds to higher-priority direct care services.

The package includes safety-net mechanisms: the committee directed DHHS to return to the fiscal committee if certain wait-list or catastrophic-aid lines approach exhaustion so that the legislature’s fiscal-review process can consider interim replenishment.","Division 3 reductions include a 3% Medicaid rate cut, the removal of family‑planning appropriations that had supported four federally qualified clinics, targeted increases for Glencliff and certain developmental services, asset sales and a plan to seek recoveries and fee changes to improve Medicaid receipts.",{"_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},6086136,"House budget trims higher education support, retools education trust fund and moves renewable fund money to ratepayers",618,6756000,7374000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90&start=6756&end=7374","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2899283-9b93fef555e446efd3d3455a21095d90/thumbnail_6756000.jpg","/articles/6086136/New-Hampshire/House-budget-trims-higher-education-support-retools-education-trust-fund-and-moves-renewable-fund-money-to-ratepayers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6086136-010875a1008601386d3a0f1e61bee17b/orig.mp4?Expires=1776086166&Signature=ANWFHlgk1EGcBbq5Ec9KTErnI3jZF1hM6QqCBBtWCbqNhNKlnEeH935YiKWzu1BB1lpyKhD7tcxNV5JILSI-NIGD7R8Cxs6mNQnIREMFLiWZM6EzghPsHkzg0OUHwkEGsud-0YMJpmt1dhwYnUdjVtHp4vMPOkCwkRICrDvjXmpOEE30O97RSDxwCcNm73hVstSuimhHrD9PdI5yqtTdK6WPADTnm08Q4V9uos2iOP0WkMDDk91p8-r7cm81W3k5pdsBXC7QEaq10bTGHAR9CKnQeOPd7Vp3jL6tE8ECfzM~H72iYgBLty2V0QWxKjrNk2-Em7StgFN4WE-FAfIVxw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee members presenting Division 2 said they reduced general-fund support for the University System of New Hampshire (USNH) and made structural changes to how lottery and trust revenues are assigned.

The House package reduces the annual general‑fund contribution to USNH by $25 million per year compared with the most recent increase the university received; committee leaders characterized that reduction as a modest share of the university system’s total revenues, citing the university’s annual report to argue the cut is a small percentage of USNH’s overall budget. Opponents and town representatives warned at the hearing that even a limited reduction could strain smaller campuses and contribute to long-term enrollment or service challenges.

Division 2 representatives also proposed moving several appropriations traditionally coded to the Education Trust Fund into the general fund and clarified that restricted lottery revenue will be dedicated to state adequacy grants for local school districts. The package increases per‑pupil special education aid by $1,040 (estimated to raise aid by about $28 million in the second year) and reintroduced a fiscal-capacity disparity aid for property-poor communities; committee leaders said these moves were intended to realign formulaic supports for districts with demonstrated needs.

On energy and economic development, committee members said House bills aim to return money from a renewable energy fund to electric-ratepayers for the biennium and to change how the renewable portfolio standard is funded; critics at the hearing described the change as taking dedicated funds that supported small-scale solar incentives and warned of legal challenges. The committee also suspended a portion of rooms-and-meals advertising aid to travel and tourism as a temporary biennial reduction, drawing objections from tourism and local-business advocates who said the cut would harm a sector that supports many jobs and local revenues.

Committee leaders defended those tradeoffs as necessary to close a statewide revenue gap and to prioritize K–12 adequacy grants, special education increases and other direct schooling supports. They said the House position leaves many of the final policy judgments to the Senate and emphasized that fiscal committee and governing-council actions can adjust allocations during the biennium.","Division 2 changes in the House package reduce state aid to the University System of New Hampshire, move some Education Trust Fund lines to the general fund, endorse House bills changing the renewable portfolio and alter rooms-and-meals tourism funding for two years.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House plan trims Division 1: cuts, board consolidations and retirement changes

House finance panel presents $16.27 billion biennial budget; general fund is small share of total

House budget cuts Medicaid rates, pauses family‑planning funding and prioritizes direct care at DHHS

House budget trims higher education support, retools education trust fund and moves renewable fund money to ratepayers