Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Reimbursement Medicaid Fmap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears county request to credit $11.2M tied to Medicaid FMAP change
Summary
County officials told a House committee that a federal increase in Medicaid matching funds during the public-health emergency led to an accounting mismatch that left counties out $11.2 million; proponents urged a two‑year state credit to restore county revenue.
The House Municipal and County Government Committee heard testimony Monday on House Bill 547, which would provide a two‑year credit to counties to cover funds counties say the state should have passed through after a federal increase in Medicaid’s FMAP.
Proponents told the committee the issue stems from a temporary rise in the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) tied to the COVID‑19 public‑health emergency. They said the higher federal share reduced the counties’ nonfederal share but that the state’s budget process failed to pass that reduction through to counties, leaving county caps and county payments unchanged.
The bill’s sponsor, Representative Steve Pearson (Rockingham District 13), introduced the measure at the counties’ request and deferred detailed description to county officials. Charles (Chuck) Nickerson, finance director for Rockingham County and treasurer of the New Hampshire Association of Counties, told the panel the change meant counties were billed twice for some period because the state did not adjust the county cap while the federal government was paying a larger share.
Nickerson said state and federal accounting left “double collection” for roughly the first 18 months of the FMAP increase and that Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) worked with the state to make counties whole for some time frame beginning July 1, 2021, but that an outstanding amount remains. He described the counties’ request as a two‑year retroactive credit and urged the committee to consider keeping municipalities whole.
Representative Jess Edwards (Rockingham District 31) asked members to weigh the budgetary consequences; he noted that the $11.2 million in the bill would likely not appear in the governor’s budget and, if enacted by the Legislature, would require the Finance Committee to find offsetting general‑fund dollars. Committee members questioned whether the shortfall reflected a bookkeeping error or an omission from the budget process; proponents said timing and the two‑year budget cadence left the amounts unrecognized when budgets were set.
Remote and in‑person public commenters were mixed; the committee’s sign‑in showed two remote supporters and five opposed. With public testimony complete, the chair closed the hearing.
The committee did not take a vote during the hearing; the measure will remain before the committee for deliberation and any amendment.
Ending: Committee members requested detail from DHHS and budget staff on whether and how the governor’s budget treats the request and the exact calculation of the counties’ claim.
