Senate committee hears plan for stable funding of New Hampshire 988 crisis services, including proposed telecom surcharge and specialty license plate

Sen. Kevin Avard opened a hearing on Senate Bill 255, which would establish a 988 Trust Fund to support New Hampshire's crisis call centers and related crisis response services, create a small telecommunications surcharge to finance the fund, and authorize an optional 988 specialty license plate.

Emma Savini of New Futures and other witnesses said 988 is the keystone of the state's behavioral‑health crisis system and that prior funding has relied on time‑limited federal sources such as ARPA. They urged a durable, state‑level revenue source so Granite Staters reach a New Hampshire response (rather than the national backup) and so mobile and follow‑up crisis services remain available.

DHHS legislative liaison Jenny O'Higgins told the committee the department's crisis‑system roadmap emphasizes three pillars — someone to call (988), someone to respond (mobile crisis/EMS partnerships), and somewhere to go (stabilization beds and placements). O'Higgins said New Hampshire's two 24/7 call centers handled more than 46,000 call/text/chat interactions in 2024 and that the calls reduce pressure on 911 and emergency departments because some calls can be routed to crisis clinicians instead of law enforcement.

Proposals in SB 255 include a telecommunications surcharge (a per‑line fee similar to how 911 is funded in New Hampshire) and creation of a 988 license plate to generate additional revenue. Witnesses argued the surcharge model mirrors 911 funding and is administratively feasible because telecommunication providers already collect similar fees.

Several providers and advocacy organizations — including NAMI New Hampshire, hospitals, maternal‑health clinicians, home‑health and hospice advocates, and others — testified in support, giving both systemic and personal reasons for durable funding. Multiple witnesses described how mobile crisis and 988 options keep people out of costly inpatient care and provide timely local responses.

CTIA, the wireless industry trade group, expressed conditional concerns about scope and urged guardrails: it said the statutory fee/tax should be carefully delimited to equipment, communication services and direct call‑taking costs, the levy amount should be set in statute for transparency, and states should avoid funding unrelated programs with the surcharge. CTIA also suggested consolidating fee collection with the bureau that administers 911 fees to avoid duplicative administration.

The New Hampshire Municipal Association asked clarifying language so that the bill's bar on local governments collecting a telecommunication surcharge does not inadvertently conflict with municipal taxation authority or create unequal tax treatment of telecommunication infrastructure under RSA 72‑A; the association requested a technical clarification tied to existing municipal statute.

DHHS presented a fiscal worksheet showing agency administrative needs to support the trust fund and ongoing oversight: the department assumed trust‑fund revenue would pay for a full‑time finance position and two part‑time administrators (quality oversight and commission support). DHHS said it expects the trust fund to reduce reliance on state general funds and on expiring federal funds that currently subsidize crisis‑system operations.

Why it matters: Supporters described SB 255 as a straightforward financing mechanism that mirrors how 911 is funded and that ensures local responders and clinicians staff New Hampshire crisis lines and mobile teams. Opponents and industry groups urged narrow statutory limits and careful drafting to avoid unintended tax or administrative consequences.

Next steps: Sponsors indicated a willingness to work on technical drafting items flagged by CTIA and the Municipal Association and to coordinate with DHHS on the department's fiscal assumptions and administrative model.