Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee hears repeal effort for Housing Champions program; business and municipal groups oppose

Committee on Commerce · February 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representative Drew proposed repealing the Housing Champions program, calling it a subsidy with poor reporting and administrative costs; business, municipal and housing groups testified in opposition, saying the new program has shown early success in increasing permits and regulatory reforms.

Representative Drew urged the Committee to repeal the Housing Champions program (HB11‑96), which he described as a poorly defined state-funded incentive that largely paid municipalities after project completion and incurred significant administrative costs.

Drew argued the program functioned as a subsidy that, in his view, did not require ongoing programmatic restraints and cited examples (e.g., Manchester) and fiscal-note concerns about administrative staffing costs. He urged repeal, asserting the program was not producing demonstrable value relative to costs.

Multiple witnesses opposed repeal. The Business and Industry Association, the New Hampshire Municipal Association, Housing Action New Hampshire, and the New Hampshire Association of Realtors testified the program is new (established 2023), has shown early success (housing-champion communities accounted for a substantial share of building permits and regulatory reforms), and that repeal could jeopardize already-obligated grant funds. Municipal and business witnesses urged giving the program more time and, if needed, making targeted changes rather than a wholesale repeal.

The committee closed the hearing on HB11‑96 after extensive testimony and indicated no immediate committee vote; members suggested letting the matter "stew" while they reviewed reports and fiscal notes.