Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Military Veterans Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contested bill to add Executive Council oversight of adjutant general and veterans home commandant draws strong opposition
Summary
SB 425, which would require periodic reappointment of the Adjutant General and convert the Veterans Home commandant to a 4-year appointed position confirmed by the Governor and Council, prompted sustained opposition from the Adjutant General, the National Guard Association, the Veterans Home commandant and board, and veterans' groups, citing U.S. Code conflicts, politicization risks, and threats to resident stability.
A proposal to add executive-branch review and periodic reappointment for the Adjutant General and to make the New Hampshire Veterans Home commandant a Governor-and-Council-confirmed four-year appointment drew sustained, often emotional opposition when the Senate Executive Departments & Administration Committee heard SB 425 on Jan. 14.
Councilor Joe Kenny Wakefield, who asked a senator to file the bill, told the committee the measure is intended to add checks and balances: a five-year reappointment review for the Adjutant General and a statutory requirement that the Veterans Home commandant be appointed by the Governor and Council for four-year terms. "This is simply a good, executive branch checks and balances bill," Councilor Kenny said, adding he did not intend the proposal as a criticism of current leaders.
Military and veterans stakeholders urged rejection. Tony (executive director of the National Guard Association of New Hampshire) and Major General David Michaelides (Adjutant General) testified they opposed the bill, arguing it would politicize the Adjutant General position, run afoul of federal law on retirement and qualification, and undermine long-term institutional relationships critical to gaining federal resources. Michaelides stated the department had not been informed prior to filing and described the proposal as "politicizing an apolitical organization."
Kim McKay, commandant of the New Hampshire Veterans Home, told the committee she opposes the bill because converting the commandant into a political appointment would undermine stability of care for residents, make the role less attractive to licensed nursing-home administrators, and risk repeated leadership turnover. "Tying this role to political cycles creates an expectation of turnover, a possibility of turnover, every four years regardless of performance," McKay said, adding that long-term leadership supports continuity and trust with veterans and families.
Other witnesses — including the Board of Managers, the State Veterans Advisory Committee, former adjutant generals, and service members — raised similar concerns about politicization, conflicts with U.S. Code and federal practice, unintended age-discrimination impacts for deputies, and the lack of an operational problem presented by the sponsor that the bill would solve. Councilor Kenny acknowledged at the hearing that an age-related provision flagged by other witnesses appeared to conflict with federal law and said it was "easily correctable." The committee closed testimony without taking final action and invited additional written input.
What happens next: Committee did not move SB 425 that day; sponsors and opponents indicated willingness to work on language amendments, but major institutional stakeholders asked the committee to reject or significantly revise the proposal to avoid politicization and unintended legal or operational consequences.
