House Concurs with Senate on Housing Bills, Carbon Moratorium, Consider Leaving ISO-NE

Screenshot

New Hampshire House was in session Thursday.

Share this story:

By PAULA TRACY, InDepthNH.org

CONCORD – The House agreed to changes made in over 30 bills by the Senate, sometimes with a bit of grumbling and others with a little begrudging praise, and those are now headed to the governor for her signature.

They include measures related to housing density, percentages needed for overriding tax local caps, carbon sequestration study and moratorium on it. Also, open enrollment in school districts, special education disputes, educating about gestational development, and allowing off the grid electric providers to be free from regulation.

The House refused to concur on only a few and asked for a committee of conference on at least one Senate Bill 210 and tabled HB 107 relative to political advertising.

Included in the bills headed to Gov. Kelly Ayotte are HB 677 relative to access of epinephrine or “Epipens” in a medical emergency at institutions of higher education and now also recreational camps, added in by the Senate.

They also concurred on HB 457 https://gc.nh.gov/bill_status/billinfo.aspx?id=886&inflect=2 relative to zoning related to dwelling units in one of the closest votes of the day, 179-170 which also received the most debate.

Some said the change would allow for frat houses on every block and could overtax septic systems while supporters said it is needed in a housing crisis. It expands the number of unrelated people who can live in a dwelling unit.

“We do have a housing crisis in this state,” said Rep. Jonas Wheeler, D-Peterborough who serves on his local zoning board.

Rep. Jack Flanagan, R-Brookline, asked him if the bill could lead to an overtax on a septic system impacting neighbors.

Wheeler said that was a possibility “but it’s up to the landlord.”

Rep. Kristine Perez, R-Londonderry, said the bill incentivizes development to convert single family homes to per-bed leases regardless of a community’s character.

Rep. Joe Alexander, R-Goffstown, said lifestyle choices are no business of the government and they do not need to know who is living in which bedroom.

The bill prohibits the municipality from adopting or enforcing any ordinance that restricts the number of occupants of any dwelling unit to less than two per bedroom…and not based on marital status or other considerations like being a student.

A bill which will establish a moratorium for forest property owners from enrolling in carbon sequestration markets and creation of a study committee for the newly emerging market which is negatively impacting state timber tax income was also approved. HB 123 was opposed by Rep. Michael Harrington, R-Strafford, who said it impacts property owners’ rights but Rep. Diane Pauer, R-Brookline, was on the winning side of the 268-74 vote noting the Senate ripped out the House-passed version to create a new aspect of the timber tax on standing timber in carbon sequestration projects and made it into a study committee.

She noted a new addition to the bill which provides an alternative option for payment in lieu of taxes which was amended into the bill somewhere along the line. A final report on what this new market is and what the state should do in terms of taxation policy will be due Nov.1, 2027.

They also concurred on HB 200 related to procedure for overriding a local tax cap, and HB 672 related to off grid electric providers.

State Rep Wendy Thomas, D-Merrimack, opposed the latter, calling it a “poorly created” bill which would not allow for accountability.

It also concurred with the Senate to pass an amended HB 690 which would allow for consideration of the state leaving ISO-NE the Independent System Operator of New England which ensures reliability of the regional power grid. 

Rep. Michael Vose, R-Epping, said it would allow the state to look at how to protect New Hampshire ratepayers from policies in other New England states.

The vote to concur was 188-155.

HB 690 directs the Department of Energy to study whether New Hampshire should withdraw from ISO-New England—the operator of our regional transmission grid. But ISO officials have confirmed New Hampshire is not a member and cannot withdraw, making the study both unnecessary and expensive.

ISO-NE doesn’t have “members” per se, though it runs the electricity grid (and wholesale power markets) in all six New England states.

Another related bill also got concurrence. 

HB 672 allows off-grid electricity producers to operate entirely outside state regulation, provided they don’t connect to the public distribution system. 

Democrats warn the bill paves the way for a two-tiered system—regulated and unregulated—without any clear benefits for everyday consumers.

In a statement after the vote, Rep. Kat McGhee, D-Hollis, ranking member of the House Science, Technology & Energy Committee, said, “Granite Staters want real solutions to bring down their energy costs—not fringe deregulation schemes or expensive studies with no return on investment. HB 672 and HB 690 do nothing to lower rates, increase reliability, or improve sustainability. They miss the mark entirely.”

Rep. Wendy Thomas, D-Merrimack, also said, “This bill gives the green light to private power setups and energy-hungry data centers, without any real oversight or responsibility to their neighbors. It creates one set of rules for most people and no rules for a select few. That’s not how we build a fair or reliable energy system.”

“People just want lower electric bills, cleaner energy, and service they can count on. HB 672 doesn’t do any of that. It just opens the door for some to cut corners while the rest of us play by the rules.”

Rep. Ned Raynolds, D-Portsmouth on HB 690 stated:

“This is a textbook example of government waste disguised as policy. New Hampshire is not a member of ISO-New England, and legally, we can’t withdraw—so spending $200,000 on a study to explore it is an insult to taxpayers.”

“Our job is to make smart energy choices that reduce costs for ratepayers. HB 690 does the opposite—it wastes time and money on a study of a problem that doesn’t even exist, instead of investing in strategies that actually help Granite Staters.”

The House will return to vote on more matters on June 26.

Comments are closed.