Sponsor proposes statewide uniform building code; municipalities and some officials urge amendment or delay

Representative Joe Alexander, sponsor of House Bill 428, told the committee the bill would make the state building code consistent across all municipalities by prohibiting local technical amendments and adopting a single statewide set of model codes and ratified board amendments. Alexander said the goal is to reduce complexity for builders and reduce costs so businesses and developers do not need consultants for each town.

Margaret Burns of the New Hampshire Municipal Association testified in opposition. She said HB 428 would remove an established local authority to adopt local codes, a power long recognized in state law. Burns emphasized that the legislature last year changed how municipal amendments become enforceable (Senate Bill 437) and urged the committee to let that recent change play out before removing municipal amendment authority entirely. She also told the committee municipal stakeholders have technical suggestions to make the bill workable if it is to proceed.

Philip Sherman, chair of the Building Code Review Board, said the board would be willing to work with the committee and offered conditional support if the bill is amended to preserve necessary administrative authorities and to account for differences across large cities and small towns. Sherman suggested moving certain land‑use provisions into RSA 155‑A and coordinating with the state fire marshal and municipal stakeholders to avoid enforcement gaps.

Business groups including the New Hampshire Home Builders Association and the Business and Industry Association supported the bill's intent to bring regulatory consistency; Home Builders' representatives cautioned they want to work on any technical fixes and preserve implementation details. Several witnesses urged that any change be handled in subcommittee and coordinated with the Building Code Review Board and municipal officials.

Why it matters: HB 428 would centralize technical authority for the state's building code and prevent more stringent municipal technical amendments. Proponents argue it reduces regulatory fragmentation that adds cost; opponents say it would strip long‑standing municipal authority and urged careful drafting and time for the recent SB 437 process to take effect.

Next steps: Committee chair announced HB 428 will go to a subcommittee for a detailed review and invited stakeholders to participate.