By PAULA TRACY, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD – What at least one state Senator called the most consequential bill of the year to address relieving the state’s top issue – the affordable housing crisis – Senate Bill 84 passed the Senate Thursday on a vote of 13-10 with Republicans divided on the issue.
It relates to minimum lot sizes for single family residences and allows for a single family home to be built on smaller lot sizes.
Sen. Dan Innis, R-Bradford was not in attendance but was a co-sponsor.
The Senate took other action Thursday and passed a Parental Bill of Rights on party lines along with changes which would include work requirements for those receiving Medicaid.
They all head now to the House.
MINIMUM LOT SIZES/HOUSING BILLS
Supporting Senate Bill 84 to establish maximum lot sizes to build single housing and theoretically allow for more housing construction were Republican Senators Tim McGough, R-Merrimack, Keith Murphy, R-Manchester, Howard Pearl, R-Loudon, Tim McConkey, R-Freedom, Victoria Sullivan, R-Manchester, and Senate President Sharon Carson, R-Londonderry.
Among the Republicans who opposed it were state Senators Denise Ricciardi, R-Bedford, Kevin Avard, R-Nashua and Tim Lang, R-Sanbornton. Also opposing it was one Democrat, Senator Debra Altschiller, D-Stratham.
The bill establishes maximum lot sizes for single-family residential uses based on the type of infrastructure (public water and sewer) available to the lot.
It requires municipalities to place a question on the ballot within one year of the bill’s implementation to determine whether to rescind those provisions.
HB 84 as amended is here: https://gc.nh.gov/bill_status/billinfo.aspx?id=1016&inflect=2GCNH
Murphy said there are communities like Salem working on increasing housing but some communities in southern New Hampshire have delayed and made it difficult and expensive for builders to get permits.
“Those costs add up until the project no longer pencils out,” and is unaffordable to construct, he said.
Of all the costs stopping builders, he said it is the unreasonably large lot size minimums.
But Sen. Ricciardi said that the bill is an unreasonable overreach, takes away local control and is an “unfunded mandate.”
Murphy said this is the bill to bring down the cost of housing in the state.
“A healthy community has room for all classes,” he said and excluding is not going to allow children and grandchildren to find homes nearby.
He said it was not a left or right issue but he saw it as a free market issue.
Sen. Avard said he opposed the bill and said some of his constituents are “apoplectic about this bill.”
He said he is worried that once the state starts doing this “we are going to have future problems.”
“Forty one percent of one town is going to have to be rezoned. Yikes,” he said, predicting that some on a fixed income could be forced to sell.
“I believe this sets a bad precedent,” he said, calling it a “poison pill” for New Hampshire which will be particularly upsetting to those in communities like Rindge, New Ipswich, Hollis and others.
Sen. Lang opposed the bill as well.
“Towns that want to do this can already do it,” he said. “I don’t think the state should force a town to change its character.”
Sen. McGough, a co-sponsor of the bill, said the real people who are apoplectic about the bill are those renters who have faced multiple rent increases year after year.
He said this is the way we solve this housing crisis by increasing supply and adding more available housing “and it is a crisis make no mistake….This is perhaps among all the zoning issues we have this year the single most important.”
Sen. Pearl said he was originally opposed to the bill but as it has been amended he said he thinks they have done a good job with it.
He said he has heard from the public and said this bill allows for a reasonable amount of local control.
Sen. Sue Prentiss, D-Lebanon, a former municipal mayor, said “the time is now” and if we don’t do something now we will continue to have the same conversation about a lack of affordable housing.
She said while campaigning there was not one door knocked where this issue was not on voters’ minds.
“We have amended the lot size. It does not apply to every piece of property,” she stressed.
Murphy agreed and issued a statement after the vote saying the bill and others remove red tape and obstacles that delay or stop builders from expanding the housing supply.
“We heard the voters loud and clear: the cost of housing is too high, indicating a lack of supply. Housing prices are up 59 percent in just the last four years. A coalition of builders, realtors, housing advocates, and employers suggested legislation to get the government out of the way and lower prices by increasing supply.
“For too long, regulations have made it financially impossible for builders to construct starter homes, which is exactly what our citizens need. I call upon our colleagues in the House to take up these bills and pass them without delay. These bills combined will begin to restore normalcy to the housing market and lower costs for our constituents. Our message to the construction industry, home builders, and realtors is this: “Gentlemen, start your engines.”
Also passed was SB 163 which blocks cities and towns from blocking all new building permits; SB 170 and SB 173 to update the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program and assess an amount equal to 10 percent of the net rental income; SB 174 which prohibits planning boards from using the number of bedrooms to deny housing developments; SB 281 which streamlines the local permit approval process for property adjacent to class VI roads; SB 283 which requires municipalities to exclude below-grade areas, such as basements or underneath parling, from floor area ratio calculations and SB 284 which limits local residential parking space mandates.
Democratic Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka, D-Portsmouth, said in a statement after the vote that “Our small businesses are starved for a strong workforce, and we can’t meet this need without affordable housing…Housing remains the number one issue, and these bills will move the needle by spurring affordable housing and starter home development while still respecting local control.”
“Democrats have worked hard across the aisle to pass legislation to address our housing crisis,” said state Sen, Tara Reardon, D-Concord.
“I’m proud of our caucus’ good faith leadership. You can count on us to continue working on a slate of impactful housing bills to secure bipartisan support and make a real difference on this critical issue.”
WORK REQUIREMENT FOR MEDICAID
A bill that would create a work requirement for the Medicaid program passed 15-8.
Some said it is a good policy for the state while Sen. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua, said a work requirement for Medicaid just won’t work.
Senate Bill 134-FN now goes to the House.
She said the average length of time someone is enrolled in Medicaid expansion is nine months. The program is a bridge between jobs, she said.
The bill will only lead to decreased enrollment, and increased costs in uncompensated care and emergency room waits, Rosenwald said.
But Sen. Pearl said this is good policy for the state and its ethics of hard work.
He said estimates are that the state will be saving $2 million after a year and there are a lot of exemptions that are available and it would only apply to working non-disabled adults under 65 and urged it go on to the House.
Sen. Prentiss, D-Lebanon, opposed it and said this would tear down a bridge that allows the time for people to get healthy and go back to work where they move to private health insurance.
Following passage, Pearl said “Medicaid and other welfare programs should serve as a lifeline for our non-aged, non-disabled adults, not the end of the line. Work requirements for Medicaid help low-income families by providing a path out of poverty and improving their living standards. Right now, New Hampshire work requirements are paired with programs like food stamps and the Temporary Aid for Needy Families. Medicaid should be treated the same way. Work helps families achieve independence and promote their health and wellness. Passing this bill promises further success in New Hampshire and will help Granite State families access the programs they need statewide.”
Rosenwald also had a statement following the vote.
“Medicaid work requirements will cost us more than it will save. Last time we implemented them, it cost the state almost $4.5 million to administer and only led to a contact rate of 1% to verify eligibility,” said Rosenwald. “This will not lead to a more efficient use of state funds. Quite the opposite: Granite Staters will lose access to health care, driving up costs not only for those who lose coverage, but for all Granite Staters. Less coverage means higher uncompensated care, causing premiums to rise and hospitals to reduce services. Right now, this program is acting as the bridge it is intended to be, with the average length of enrollment at 9 months. We should instead be focused on lowering the cost of living, like my Help for Low Income Seniors Act which passed today and will lower health care costs for low-income seniors.”
PARENTS BILL OF RIGHTS
The Senate supported passage of SB 72, a Parents Bill of Rights, which would place existing statutes into one place for parents to be able to easily access, said Sen. Lang.
The vote was 15-8.
But Sen. Pat Long, D-Manchester, opposed it noting it would change the standard of proof for employees of school districts to report to parents using clear and convincing evidence rather than the lesser preponderance of evidence.
Some have said this forces teachers’ hands by “outing” students who may be facing gender dysphoria issues by compelling the school to tell the parents what they know after receiving a written request from the parent.
Following the vote, Lang issued a statement saying, “Granite State parents know best when it comes to directing their children’s upbringing, education, and care. New Hampshire parents should decide what is best for their children. Parents should have more of a say in their child’s education, not less. If parents have questions about what their child is learning or being exposed to, parents deserve to know what is happening in the classroom. We want power to be given back to New Hampshire parents, and we must reinforce the idea that parents know what’s best for their children.”