#

It took less than a week for August to bring five homicides to New Hampshire, pushing the 2022 death toll higher than the typical yearly total with five months left to go.

Granite Staters are unnerved, not just by the number but the nature of the killings as well. Already in August, five more people have been killed, including two children in a Northfield triple homicide.

There have been 22 homicides recorded this year, well above the annual five-year average of 18. In the past week alone, a Northfield mother and two of her children, Kassandra Sweeney, 25, and Benjamin Sweeney, 4, and Mason Sweeney, 1, were found shot in the head in their Weathersfield Drive home. There have been no arrests and police have not named a suspect.

In Nashua, 53-year-old Lee Knoetig was allegedly shot and killed by 19-year-old Alexander Wheeler outside a gas station on Friday night.

Also on Friday, Julie Graichen, 34, was found dead of a stab wound in her Kinsley Street home. Miguel Ramirez, age 30 of Nashua, has been charged with second-degree murder.

And then there is the ongoing mystery of the deaths of Stephen and Desjwende Reid, their bodies found on a Concord trail in April. Little progress has been made since. On Friday, the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office was again pleading with the public, this time to help identify a “person of interest.”

New Hampshire has consistently enjoyed one of the lowest homicide rates in the nation. But that appears likely to change this year. Another change, as evidenced in the case of the Sweeney brothers, is the uptick in murders of children. The grim trend can be traced back to the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic-enforced lockdowns.

Since they started, eight New Hampshire children have been killed in homicides — not including a 15-day-old infant whose death is being investigated as suspicious. And New Hampshire law enforcement continues searching for Harmony Montgomery who went missing from her allegedly abusive Manchester home more than two years ago and has not been seen since.

Cassandra Sanchez, New Hampshire’s Child Advocate, said COVID lockdowns, job losses, and school closures, left vulnerable children and their families under tremendous pressure. And, she says, their effects are still being felt.

“I think we’re battling a lot with COVID,” Sanchez said. “A lot of high stress and the isolation period with COVID, and we’re now trying to get back to some kind of normalcy, which isn’t normal at all.”

Child safety workers with New Hampshire’s Division of Children Youth and Families were unable to get into the homes of children where abuse and neglect were suspected during long stretches during the pandemic shutdowns. Sanchez said that’s improved in recent months, but there are many holdovers from the crisis that will be seen for years to come.

“There is a mental health crisis spiking after COVID. We knew it was coming. We still don’t know how long it’s supposed to last, and we still don’t know if it’s peaked yet.”

 The lockdowns and isolation have created a social/emotional developmental gap for many children, similar to the learning gap children are suffering from because of the lockdowns closures. It could take years to deal with the increased need for treatment, and the current lack of resources, Sanchez said. 

At least three of the children killed or reported missing during the pandemic had contact with DCYF before their deaths — Manchester’s Mason Tremblay, 2, who was reportedly killed by his mother, Mercedes Tremblay, 25, before she killed herself; Elijah Lewis, 5, the Merrimack boy who was missing for a month before authorities were called. His body was eventually found in the woods in Massachusetts and now his mother, Danielle Dauphinais, 35, is currently charged with his murder. And Harmony Montgomery’s father, Adam Montgomery, is currently charged with assaulting the child before she went missing.

A report released by Gov. Chris Sununu’s office in March found New Hampshire’s DCYF missed several potentially key opportunities to protect Harmony Montgomery, then 7, before she was declared missing in December 2021.

Montgomery’s family was designated as high risk by DCYF during home visits in 2019, but case workers failed to track her down after learning she was no longer living in the same house in early 2020. It also took DCYF workers several months to disclose that the child was missing.

The DCYF failure to protect Harmony Montgomery is reminiscent of the failures that led to the murder of Nashua’s Brielle Gage in 2014. She was 3 when her mother, Katlyn Marin, beat her to death over a late-night snack the child took. Brielle Gage had been removed from her mother’s care a dozen times by DCYF before the murder because of the mother’s abuse. But in each instance, the agency returned the child to Marin.

The girl’s father, William Boucher, eventually settled a lawsuit with the state over the lack of protection for his daughter. The Gage case, and other high-profile DCYF failures, forced then-Gov. Maggie Hassan to initiate a third-party review of the agency that found it regularly failed to protect children, with managers forcing caseworkers to record abuse cases as unfounded and close them — despite evidence of abuse and neglect — in order to report better rates of closure.

When it comes to the opioid crisis, one would expect every state dollar allocated to the epidemic would be spent. That’s apparently not exactly what happened this fiscal year. A substantial surplus remains in the Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund, also known as the Alcohol Fund, and lawmakers are trying to pin the blame on almost everyone.

The Alcohol Fund was created in 2000 by the Legislature as a mechanism that takes 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support education, prevention, treatment, and recovery programs for substance abuse, which encompasses alcohol and drug abuse.

The focus right now for the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol Drug Abuse Prevention, Treatment, and Recovery, which gives out the funds, is the opioid crisis, but alcohol abuse is also part of its mission. The commission was allocated approximately $9 million in the 2017 fiscal year and will reportedly end the year on June 30 $2 million to $4 million in the black.

Tym Rourke, chair of the governor’s commission, said he is working with the Department of Health and Human Services to determine the exact amount and will release those figures this week.

That’s where the confusion lies for legislators as they finalize the state’s biennium budget this month. DHHS Commissioner Jeffrey Meyers has said he anticipates a $2 million surplus from contracts that didn’t use their full funds. The nonpartisan Legislative Budget Assistant is putting the number at $4.3 million. The discrepancy and uncertainty as to why the funds weren’t all used during the year was on full display during the Senate marathon budget session on Wednesday.

Sen. Martha Hennessey, D-Hanover, who also sits on the governor’s commission, questioned why there was an amendment introduced that would allocate $2 million from the Alcohol Fund for the construction of a juvenile substance abuse wing at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester without the commission’s approval.

Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, said they had to have “some frank talk” about the Alcohol Fund.

“It is pathetic that there is $4.3 million sitting in an account unexpended in the middle of a heroin crisis. That’s what we should be focused on. That’s outrageous,” he said. “So let’s look at the reforms this amendment tries to put in place … that’s called taking action, not sitting on $4.3 million.”

Hennessey countered to say that the fund would only have a $2 million surplus, but said Gov. Chris Sununu and Meyers should also be to blame.

“The governor and commissioner at HHS have not helped to facilitate the spending of this,” she said. “They are waiting to find out what kind of health care we’re going to have, what’s going on with Medicaid, all of which is up in the air. So if our governor and HHS aren’t helping to make this possible, that money can’t be spent.”

The Alcohol Fund fund has only been fully financed one time since its inception, which was in the 2003-2004 biennium — the first year it began. Since then, governors or the Legislature transferred the revenue to the general fund and would only appropriate a small amount to the Alcohol Fund. In the current biennium passed under former Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan, the fund was financed at 1.7 percent. In Sununu’s budget proposal and in the Senate’s budget, the fund was doubled to 3.4 percent.

Rourke applauded the Senate for increased monies to the fund, but reminded lawmakers that the Alcohol Fund is non-lapsing and any money left over is rolled over to the next fiscal year, so the commission could “repurpose and redeploy those dollars.”

Rourke said he had concerns about another amendment introduced in the Senate budget that would give the DHHS commissioner the ability to take money out of the Alcohol Fund itself and not from the potential surplus.

“The [governor’s] commission has a statutory authority over the fund and DHHS administers it, based on priorities set by the Commission” he told NH Journal. “The main concern is the precedent it would give for a commissioner to take money from the Alcohol Fund, without approval of the spending plan by the Commission.”

He said the 3.4 percent funding for the next biennium is mostly going to be used to sustain ongoing investments and state contracts to combat the opioid crisis. If the commissioner can take funds at anytime, Rourke is concerned that they would have to cancel contracts and put funding for other programs at risk.

So why is there a surplus in the first place? Rourke attributes it to two factors: Medicaid and workforce issues.

When the Legislature voted to renew Medicaid expansion in 2016, treatment and recovery centers were not clear if people who showed up would be covered by private or public insurance. The commission wanted to keep the funds available to those centers in case they needed to cover their insurance costs. Rourke said contractors ultimately didn’t need to draw on those funds.

He also said the workforce crisis in the mental health system resulted in funds not being used by contractors.

“We have treatment contractors who may have been given funding and have had a difficult time hiring appropriate staff,” he said. “Obviously, you’re not drawing on that salary while you’re waiting for that hire. If you talk to providers, there is that pressure on them on hiring and maintaining staff.”

The Senate budget is likely to go to a conference committee with the House, where lawmakers from both chambers will go over the details before voting on the final spending plan. The House previously stripped money for the Alcohol Fund in its version of the budget, so Rourke said he will continue to work with lawmakers on ensuring the funds are kept in place.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Sign up for NH Journal’s must-read morning political newsletter.

A bill banning discrimination against gender identity appears to be in trouble in the New Hampshire House. Before the House votes, House Speaker Shawn Jasper is recommending that representatives table the bill.

“The bill is just not ready to move forward,” he told the Concord Monitor. “My concern is with those who are transitioning … going into restrooms, showers, locker rooms, anyplace where it may make someone uncomfortable for a whole myriad of reasons.”

House Bill 478 would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. At least 18 other states, including other New England states like Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, have gender identity anti-discrimination laws on the books, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

New Hampshire already has a law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, but not gender identity. A previous version of this bill was defeated in 2009, but former Gov. Maggie Hassan signed an executive order banning gender identity discrimination in state government.

The current bill passed the House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee on a 15-2 vote, and includes sponsors from high-ranking Democrats and Republicans, including House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff and Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley.

Over the weekend, lawmakers’ email accounts were flooded with comments about the legislation. More than 800 emails since Friday appeared in representatives’ inboxes through the House-wide listserv, according to reports. The hard part is sifting through it all to determine who is writing and where its coming from.

Some of the emails were templates from people who didn’t give an address or full name, making it difficult to determine if they were state residents or not, and lawmakers said they were receiving more emails in opposition than in support of the bill, resulting in some representatives changing their support.

“The public is not ready,” wrote Rep. Jess Edwards, R-Auburn, in an email to all House members on Sunday. Edwards backed the bill in committee, but changed his mind after the influx in messages.

“The number of people who have written stating that this bill essentially offers their children up to sexual predators is outrunning by 5 to 1 the number of emails stating that it’s time to end the daily beatings of transgendered people,” he added. “The passionate are yelling past each other with worst case scenarios. I don’t think this is an environment in which the legislature should pick a side.”

Advocates of the bill turned out in overwhelming support for the bill when the committee heard public testimony on it in February, making it seem like it had the majority of public backing and would sail through the rest of the Republican-led Legislature. They say the protections are needed for transgender people, who testified they have been fired, harassed, or discriminated against because of their gender identity.

“I have experienced way too many instances of employment discrimination,” said Shana Aisenberg, a transgendered woman from Freedom who is a musician and music teacher, at the hearing. “Musicians with whom I play stopped calling me. Students cancelled lessons. A music camp where I taught for 10 years fired me because I changed my gender.”

However, opponents of the bill said it could lead to men entering women’s bathrooms to take advantage of them. The bill is not specifically about bathrooms, but it’s an example that’s been widely used throughout the country. Conservatives say it’s about protecting the rights of privacy and religious liberty for New Hampshire residents.

On the religious liberty front, Cornerstone Action is claiming that the bill would negatively impact churches and religious organizations. A lawsuit could potentially arise out of churches, faith-based charities, schools, and ministries who are protected by the state religious exemption, but it’s only applied to “persons of the same religioun or denomination.”

Law experts have argued that these faith-based organizations would have to check everyone at the door to determine if they are of the same religion or denomination in order to maintain separate gender bathrooms. Even if someone argues that they belong to the same religion, they could sue for discrimination against their rights, and the legal fees could be crippling for the faith-based groups. They point to an incident that happened in Massachusetts last year as an example.

Cornerstone Chairman Charlie McKinney wrote a letter to constituents asking them to sign on to a petition that would go to Jasper. The petition states the bill puts “the feelings of gender-confused individuals” over citizen privacy and safety.

“For centuries, we have had social mores, now dubbed ‘discriminatory,’ that are in truth loving, since they informally embraced a moral code that pointed to acceptance of how God created us,” he wrote in the letter. “Although most of the national press on this issue has focused on bathrooms, that’s not what is really at stake for us as Christians. At issue here, as with most other social issues, is the freedom to declare the Truth and conform our lives to the will and design of our Father and Creator.”

It’s possible that a majority of Jasper’s emails are coming from people who signed the petition, which includes a pre-written text. But Freedom New Hampshire, a group that supports the bill, also has a similar message on its website for people to sign, click, and send to their representatives.

“This legislation is about leveling the playing field. Everyone deserves to work hard, put a roof over their head and participate in public life without constant fear of discrimination,” the note states. “But because there are no explicit protections for transgender people under state law in housing, employment, or public accommodations, they must live in fear every day of being wrongly fired, evicted, or denied service—just because of who they are.”

Yet, the possible defeat, or delay, of this bill could have been expected, according to a recent survey on the bill. The Citizens Count, NH’s Live Free or Die Alliance — a nonpartisan organization looking to give citizen’s a voice in their local government — conducted a Facebook survey of New Hampshire residents on their support for the bill in January.

Approximately 56 percent of respondents said they opposed the bill and 44 percent said they supported it. Of course, the methodology is not an exact science, but the results and testimony provide insight from people who might not be able to attend a public hearing at the State House in the middle of a work day.

The national debate on transgender rights comes at a difficult time in the community’s fight. It started last year when North Carolina passed a bill requiring people to use public restrooms that match the gender on their birth certificates. Texas is poised to take up a similar bill during the current legislative session.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

Despite several inches of snow in most parts of the state, substance abuse prevention advocates and recovering addicts made the trek to the State House to show support for a bill that would be able to fund more recovery programs in the Granite State.

“What are we waiting for?,” deputy director at New Futures Kate Frey asked at a Tuesday press conference. New Futures is a nonprofit advocacy organization looking to prevent and reduce substance abuse in the New Hampshire. According to her, the state is suffering a serious epidemic and needs creativity to get out of it.

One of those creative solutions unique to New Hampshire and endorsed by New Futures should be fully funding the state’s Alcohol Fund.

The New Hampshire Alcohol Fund was created in 2000 as a non-lapsing and continually appropriated fund to support alcohol and drug education, abuse prevention, and treatment programs. The law provides 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support such programs. The funds would be allocated to the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Intervention, and Treatment to pay contracts for service providers in the communities hardest hit by opioid abuse.

The fund began during the 2003-2004 biennium and was fully funded in that budget. But every year since, the 5 percent funding has been suspended by either the governor or the legislature, and revenue transferred to the General Fund. In the subsequent years, the legislature appropriated only a small amount of general funds — significantly less than the 5 percent that was mandated by law for prevention and treatment.

The 2016-2017 state budget allocated only 1.7 percent to the Alcohol Fund. That total amount equated to about $6.6 million, instead of the $19 million had the fund received the total 5 percent. In the previous legislative session, lawmakers allocated an additional $2.5 million from the General Fund for prevention, treatment, and recovery in 2017, bringing the total to $9.1 million.

But a bill in the Senate would fully fund the Alcohol Fund for the 2017-2018 biennium at the 5 percent rate. At a hearing for Senate Bill 166 on Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee, prime sponsor Sen. Jay Kahn, D-Kenne, said if the state is going to be serious about addressing the opioid crisis by focusing on prevention, intervention, treatment, and recovery, then legislators should be doing everything possible to get ahead of the problem.

“Where we invest our money is a direct reflection of our priorities, and our priorities ought to be with people in New Hampshire who need care,” he said. Kahn also called for creative ways to fight to crisis with “yankee ingenuity.”

But it might not be an easy task to convince the Legislature that this is a worthwhile endeavor.

In the last biennium budget, lawmakers approved $42 million in substance abuse funding. Former Gov. Maggie Hassan was criticized for originally vetoing the budget, delaying the appropriation of the funds by three months. The total amount was $14 million more than the 2014-2015 budget. During the legislative session, lawmakers approved at least $5 million in additional funding.

Some legislators on the Senate Finance Committee were concerned that the state has already spent a significant amount of money, yet didn’t seem to fix anything.

“If we just throw money at the problem, we don’t necessarily solve the problem,” Sen. Bob Giuda, R-Warren, said.

Gov. Chris Sununu is scheduled to release his budget proposal for the 2018-2019 biennium on Thursday, so it remains to be seen how much money he’s putting towards the opioid crisis or if he plans to fully fund the Alcohol Fund. During his bid for the corner office, Sununu and his Democratic challenger Colin van Ostern said they supported returning the Alcohol Fund to 5 percent.

In his inauguration speech, Sununu said getting the opioid crisis under control was the state’s top priority.

“I believe we need to start in the beginning in terms of our schools,” he said on January 5. “Aggressive prevention programs in our schools that start earlier, that are more aggressive. And I think we need to start bringing in the parents and the stakeholders into those programs. There is a different path for everybody and we need to be open to all the paths. We need to put resources behind our words and take real action.”

NH Journal previously reported fully funding the Alcohol Fund had bipartisan support among most of the gubernatorial candidates. And when the fund was first debated in 2000, it received widespread, bipartisan support in the House and Senate. Former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen vetoed the original legislation establishing the Alcohol Fund, but a two-thirds majority in the House and Senate overrode her veto, so it has the potential to appeal to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.