inside sources print logo
Get up to date New Hampshire news in your inbox

Northern Pass Public Hearings Begin, DES Nominee Questioned on Project

As the New Hampshire legislative session quickly comes to a close, the public hearings for the controversial Northern Pass project are just beginning to heat up. Thursday marked the first of three scheduled public statement hearings in Concord for people who are not intervenors in the project but have an interest in what happens.

The 192-mile proposed transmission line from Pittsburg to Deerfield would bring roughly 1,090 megawatts of hydropower from Quebec to the New England power grid. Proponents say the $1.6 billion project could reduce the state’s high electricity costs and encourage businesses to move to New Hampshire. Opponents disagree and say the project would ruin the Granite State’s tourism industry due to the the high-voltage towers and construction that would impact local businesses.

“The proposed army of giant towers marching across the spines of these towns will cripple tourism, property values, community spaces, and family recreation, not to mention, their children’s health,” said Kathleen Sims of New Boston.

A total of 117 people are scheduled to make statements about the project during the upcoming hearings and about 70 percent have indicated that they oppose the project. June 15 was the first one, but there are others scheduled for June 22 and July 20. A possible fourth hearing could be included if more time is needed.

The hearings are part of the Site Evaluation Committee’s (SEC) ongoing adjudicative hearings that will continue throughout the summer months. The committee must decide whether to approve or deny Eversource’s Northern Pass application by September 30.

Eversource claims the hydropower from Canada will save New Hampshire ratepayers $60 million annually. Opponents are concerned about how much residents would ultimately benefit from the project and if they would end up getting stuck with the construction bill.

Although a majority of the speakers are against the energy project, some said the benefits outweighed the risks.

“There is no perfect solution when it comes to building out our energy infrastructure, but it seems to me that Northern Pass has struck the optimal balance,” said Tom Farrelly, a commercial realtor in Manchester.

Michael Skelton, president and CEO of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, said the state’s economic future depends on new sources of electricity and lower electric rates.

“The key question to consider is, ‘Do the benefits outweigh the potential impacts?’ and the benefits unquestionably, yes, outweigh the impacts,” he said. “This is the best large-scale option we have before us right now with real tangible benefits to our state.”

The hearing saw two Republican state representatives speak out on opposite sides of the project.

Rep. Herb Richardson, R-Lancaster, said most people in the North Country favor Northern Pass because it would bring jobs and new tax revenues for towns along its route.

Rep. Brad Bailey, R-Monroe, said the North Country depends on the tourism industry and the project would ruin New Hampshire’s vistas, drive away jobs, and ultimately not lead to lower electric rates.

Students from Yale University traveled to the hearing to voice their opposition to the project. They also went to publicly ask the university’s administration to end its lease with Northern Pass. Bayroot, LLC is owned by Yale’s endowment and has a land agreement with Eversource which includes 24 miles in Coos County the company can use for the transmission lines.

However, the entities signed an updated agreement earlier this month extending the lease for another 93 years.

At a separate hearing on Thursday, Gov. Chris Sununu’s nominee to lead the state’s Department of Environmental Services (DES) was grilled over his position on Northern Pass.

“I think the issue is balance,” said Robert Scott, Sununu’s nominee. “I haven’t heard all the testimony to understand are the negatives outweighed by the positives.”

Sununu has been a fervent supporter of Northern Pass since his gubernatorial campaign last year. Scott currently sits on the SEC since he is one of the three state Public Utilities Commissioners, but he has recused himself from the Northern Pass evaluation process and indicated he would continue to do that if confirmed as DES commissioner.

More testimony at the Northern Pass public hearings is expected to include Granite State lawmakers, like Republican Reps. Bing Judd of Pittsburg and Neal Kurk of Weare. Expect to see more emotions and passionate pleas from residents before the SEC makes its final decision.

“I want you to know and I want you to understand that I would cut out my tongue and dig out my heart with a spoon before I would come to any conclusions I believe would be injurious to the town I love so much,” said Meredith Briggs of Deerfield. “Deerfield is my past, Deerfield is my present, and Deerfield is my future.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

School Vouchers vs. ESA: The School Choice Debate in NH Heats Up

Education Freedom Accounts Serve the Public Good

The House Education Committee heard testimony on a Senate bill Tuesday that would establish “education freedom savings accounts” for students in the state. Emotions ran high during the crowded hearing in what has been a battle of school choice advocates versus supporters of public schools. Yet, the terms “school vouchers” and “education savings accounts” (ESA) haven often been thrown around synonymously at the New Hampshire State House, resulting in misinformation being spread around about Senate Bill 193.

The bill would allow parents of students between the ages of 5 and 20 to work with an approved scholarship organization to receive 90 percent of the per-pupil state grant funds (approximately $3,500) to be used to cover tuition or other costs at a school of the family’s choice. The family can use the funds to pay for private school tuition — including religious schools — homeschooling expenses, and other academic expenses. The bill passed the Senate on a 14-9 vote in March.

Opponents of the bill claim the ESA would take funding away from public schools that need it most, since students from underfunded or struggling school districts would most likely take advantage of the program. The critics also said the program would unconstitutionally provide taxpayer dollars to religious schools.

Supporters argue the bill would give parents more options for their students, since they know what’s best for their own children. They also claim that by granting parents alternatives to public schools, it would create competition and encourage public schools to increase their performance.

“The American education system has substantially failed to produce what they’re charging for,” said bill sponsor Sen. John Reagan, R-Deerfield, at the hearing.

“It is trying to resolve the problem of having the most expensive education system in the world, and not having the best prepared students in the world,” he added. “The argument we hear is, if we take all this money from our public schools – and this is what our public school administrators tell us – they tell us they won’t know what to do.”

Yet, several opponents of the bill have been using the terms ESA and school vouchers interchangeably to describe what the legislation would do.

The state’s largest teacher union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT-NH), has also been telling its supporters that the ESA bill is code for a school voucher program.

“SB 193 is a voucher bill under the guise of ‘Education Freedom Savings Accounts,'” they wrote on their website.

Voucher programs and education savings accounts are similar, but not identical. However, the distinction between them is often muddled by politically-loaded terms. A state school voucher program grants parents a credit for a certain tuition value that they can use to enroll their child in a private school

ESAs are similar, but offer more flexibility to the parents. When parents get an ESA, they are awarded a yearly sum that can be mixed and matched to suit their children’s educational needs. The funds can be used all for private school tuition, like a voucher, or they can split it among many education opportunities like private tutoring, textbooks, and even saving for college.

The AFT-NH encouraged their supporters to fill out a robo-petition that would be sent to lawmakers encouraging them to vote “no” on SB 193 and creating ESA for students.

“Despite being labeled an ‘Education Freedom Savings Account,’ make no mistake this is a voucher bill which will directly take taxpayer dollars intended for our public schools and divert to private and other institutions,” the petition website states.

House Education Committee Chairman Rick Ladd, R-Haverhill, said his panel would likely vote on the bill at the end of the month. The committee has until April 26 to act on this legislation, at which point, it would probably go to the House Finance Committee before reaching the House floor for a vote.

Due to Republicans holding a slight majority in the House, it’s likely the bill will pass committee. What ultimately happens when it comes to a floor vote in the full House is anyone’s guess.

A recent survey from Citizens Count, NH’s Live Free or Die Alliance found 54 percent of respondents were opposed to “granting parents a portion of state funds to pay educational expenses for private or home-schooled students” and 46 percent supported the measure.

The bill has even grabbed the attention of former Republican presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who wrote a Monday op-ed in the New Hampshire Union Leader expressing his support of the ESA bill.

“Empowering parents with the freedom to choose encourages positive change because the right to educate their children no longer can be taken for granted,” Bush wrote. “It must be earned. I commend Sen. John Reagan and Rep. Joseph Pitre for introducing this legislation, and Gov. Chris Sununu, who has been a passionate advocate for school choice.”

There are still some questions to be answered and changes the bill needs before the House votes on it. House Finance Committee Chairman Neal Kurk, R-Weare, said he supports the bill, but the question over funds going to religious schools would need to be addressed. The state constitution expressly forbids taxpayer funds going to religious schools.

Anne Edwards, an attorney with the state’s attorney’s office, warned lawmakers at the Tuesday hearing that if they don’t tweak the bill in regards to the religious school issue, the state could face legal and constitutional challenges.

However, Kate Baker, director of the Children’s Scholarship Fund, said legislators shouldn’t let the threat of litigation stop them from passing the bill.

“I believe this will be in the courts, no matter what you do,” she said. “Parents want to go to court and fight for their right to make these choices for their children.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

House Finance Committee Takes Ax to Gov. Sununu’s Budget Proposal

With about $59 million less to spend than expected, it’s natural that the House Finance Committee would trim a few items from Gov. Chris Sununu’s budget proposal. Yet, the cuts they’re making are concerning advocates who championed Sununu for including them in the first place.

On Wednesday, Republican budget writers in the House killed Sununu’s plan to spend $18 million over the biennium to expand full-day kindergarten programs. They also cut a $5 million college scholarship program.

“This is a short-sighted decision by a subcommittee of the Finance Committee,” said Mark Shriver, president of Save the Children Action Network, in a statement. “When he proposed his budget last month, Governor Sununu showed that he recognizes the importance of a full-day of kindergarten and understands the long-term economic benefits quality early learning programs can have for New Hampshire. The Republican majority in the House should stand with Governor Sununu and vote to put the full-day kindergarten funding request back into the budget.”

Full-day kindergarten isn’t the only proposal on the chopping block. The Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund was also cut this week.

The Alcohol Fund was created in 2000 by a bipartisan majority in the Legislature to be a funding mechanism that takes 5 percent of the gross profits from the sale of alcohol to support education, prevention, treatment, and recovery programs for alcohol and drugs. 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 communities.

The fund has only been fully financed one time since its inception, which was in the 2003-2004 biennium. In his budget speech, Sununu proposed increasing the funds to 3.4 percent, double the 1.7 percent rate the previous budget had set.

“First, I propose we double the Alcohol Fund, increasing these important resources by more than $3 million and creating incentives to ensure that those funds are truly spent,” he said in his Thursday speech.

In several biennium budgets, the governor or Legislature would usually suspend the formula and allocate monies from the general fund to go to substance abuse prevention, treatment, and recovery.

Since there’s $59 million less in tax revenue coming in than expected when Sununu wrote his budget, Alcohol Fund advocates suspected that lawmakers would suspend the formula again. However, a more dramatic approach was taken by the House Finance Committee on Tuesday.

An amendment introduced by Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, was added to the budget in House Bill 2 that would repeal the Alcohol Fund for good and it passed in a 6-4 vote on party lines.

“They’re trying to get to a number and they’re trying to come up with different avenues to do that, and some are very creative,” said Kate Frey, vice president of advocacy for New Futures, a nonprofit advocacy group that’s been one of the biggest proponents of the Alcohol Fund.

“New Futures has always been in favor of restoring the Alcohol Fund and using it as intended by the original statute to address problems for the substance abuse crisis,” she told NH Journal. “The fact that they are repealing the Alcohol Fund in its entirety is very unsettling.”

Advocates and some lawmakers like the fund because it’s non-lapsing and flexible, which is a creative and innovative solution to curb the opioid epidemic. The funds are non-restrictive, unlike some federal funds from grants that can’t be used to build brick-and-mortar recovery centers, for example.

New Hampshire is expected to receive $6 million, less than the $10 million previously anticipated by state officials, from the 21st Century Cures Act, bipartisan legislation approved by Congress and signed into law by former President Barack Obama in December, which gave $6.3 billion in funding to states hit hardest by the opioid crisis.

When Kurk introduced the amendment, advocates were also concerned because the language in the amendment appeared that he also repealed the authority of the Governor’s Commission to disperse the funds. The issue was cleared up on Wednesday, when that language was changed, giving the authority back to the Governor’s Commission to allocate funds, but still repealing the Alcohol Fund. The measure passed on a 5-4 vote on party lines, with Kurk absent.

Rep. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua, who sits on the House Finance Committee, said the Governor’s Commission would receive $5.9 million in 2018 and $6.2 million in 2019 for alcohol and drug abuse education, prevention, treatment, and recovery, slightly less than what was allocated in the current biennium. If the elimination of the Alcohol Fund is passed, it would be up to the Legislature in each budget to allocate whatever they thought was an appropriate amount.

“Without the stability of that fund, it’s concerning to providers that are thinking about expanding their services here,” Rosenwald told NH Journal. “The flat funding for the next two years doesn’t expand access to treatment or recovery very much.”

When introducing the amendment in New Hampshire, Kurk said it was inappropriate for alcohol funds to go to the opioid crisis and that the issue the fund was originally created to solve, alcohol abuse, isn’t the main issue anymore — it’s opioids.

Advocates were quick to point out that the statute language when it was first written allowed funds to be used for alcohol and drug abuse programs. They also dismissed the idea that New Hampshire doesn’t have an alcohol problem anymore. According to a 2014 report, the Granite State’s per capita alcohol consumption is nearly twice the national average.

“I was very surprised at the elimination of the [Alcohol] Fund and I was surprised that they would suggest that somehow there is a disconnect between alcohol and our current opioid epidemic,” said Tym Rourke, chair of the Governor’s Commission, in an interview with NH Journal.

“The suggestion that New Hampshire only has an opioid problem is just false and somewhat disappointing that the Legislature would be picking one group of individuals who are suffering over another,” he added.

Previously, the Senate Finance Committee recommended passage of Senate Bill 196, which would put the Alcohol Fund at the 3.4 percent rate originally proposed by Sununu. The bill was laid on the table so lawmakers could go through the budget process before deciding on the fate of that bill.

Once the House Finance Committee signs off on the budget, it goes to the full House for a vote. The Senate will then get their turn to go line-by-line in the budget. At this point, Senate budget writers could have more money to play with since revenue estimates change throughout the year, so in theory, reinstating the Alcohol Fund and funding full-day kindergarten could see a new life. Advocates for those issues are hopeful the Senate would return them to the budget for Sununu to sign.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

How Does Gov. Sununu’s Budget Encourage Young People to Stay in NH?

Time and time again, New Hampshire lawmakers are told that they should be concerned about the state’s aging population. What kind of workforce is going to replace baby boomers as they retire and how does this older population impact housing, health care, child care, and transportation costs?

A governor’s commitment of encouraging young people to stay or come back to the state is usually revealed in their budget proposal, and Gov. Chris Sununu’s recent speech provides some clues on how he plans to do that.

In his Tuesday presentation to members of the House and Senate Finance Committees, Sununu was asked to cite his priorities in his budget.

“With me, everything is about not what we do in two years, it’s what we do for five, 10, and 20 years down the road,” the governor said. “So, I’m really trying my best to bring a philosophy of true long-term planning and long-term thinking. It’s about kids. It’s about what’s happening with our students, what’s happening with our younger population, making sure we can create a foundation there that can be lasting.”

Granted, it’s nearly impossible for Sununu or the Legislature to impact natural population change. As baby boomers retire, the state’s working population, aged 20 to 64, will begin a steady decline, dropping 50,000 persons from 2010 to 2030, which would strain already tight labor supplies and restrain economic growth and vitality, according to research from the New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies (NHCPPS).

New Hampshire’s two-year policymaking process also doesn’t help lawmakers’ ability to anticipate and plan for long-term demographic change, but it’s something they should focus on, the Center argues in a 2016 demographic report.

Of course, how to attract young people also differs based on party beliefs. The Republican solution is usually to cut business taxes to make New Hampshire more competitive, with the understanding that more business growth will bring more jobs, which will bring more young people to the state. Democrats believe that New Hampshire needs a massive infrastructure investment, such as a commuter rail connecting Manchester and Nashua to Boston.

Steve Norton, executive director of NHCPPS, said it’s a constant battle of perspectives and there is always going to be some state investment to encourage young people to stay.

Besides making decisions on which projects to fund, Norton said it can be difficult for lawmakers to decide which age group to focus on. Should they look at keeping early 20-somethings in the state or the late-20s-early-30s group who might want to come back?

“We have always lost 20-somethings for reasons that are obvious,” he told NH Journal. “It’s not always the most exciting place or they want to move to an urban center like Boston or [Washington] D.C. When I think about this question of workforce development, it’s really that 30-something population that is coming here.”

Norton pointed to policies in Sununu’s budget that help “create a connection to New Hampshire,” which would encourage a young person to stay after graduating from college or to come back to settle down. He focused on Sununu’s creation of a scholarship program and full-day kindergarten proposal.

Sununu proposed a new $5 million-a-year scholarship fund to assist high school students to attend colleges, universities, or workforce training programs in the Granite State. He said the Governor’s Scholarship Fund would be administered by a proposed commission and would be based partially on need to serve “at least 1,000 students each year.”

He is also seeking $9 million a year to fund full-day kindergarten. He said the funds, which would be awarded in addition to education adequacy grants, would target communities that need it most. It’s expected that he will receive some pushback from Republicans on this policy proposal, so expect the amount of funding to change in subsequent versions of the budget.

“Both of those policies have an impact on young people and there’s an increasing likelihood that they would come back or stay,” Norton said. “Sununu’s expansion of kindergarten could be an important distinction for people who want to start a family, since we know decisions that many people make are based on the strength of the local school systems.”

It can be argued that Sununu isn’t investing enough in higher education, since he didn’t propose increasing the state’s community college or university system’s budget. Without an increase in funding, it’s highly likely they will increase tuition for the next academic school year. The University System of New Hampshire is one of the most expensive public universities in the country and graduating students have some of the highest student loan debt in the nation. With high debt, young people might take more lucrative jobs in urban centers or in other states.

Norton said organizations and businesses that support workforce development and incentivize young people with benefits, such as loan forgiveness programs, could pave the way for a younger and stronger New Hampshire economy.

Kate Luczko, president and CEO of Stay Work Play New Hampshire — a nonprofit group focused on retaining young people in the state — echoed Norton’s sentiments, saying her organization partners with businesses to make their opportunities better known to high school and college students.

“I’m trying to get this message across that being a townie is cool,” she told NH Journal. “Somehow, kids feel like if they want to be seen as successful that means leaving New Hampshire, and there is this stigma of not being cool if you stick around.”

Norton said even the symbolism of having a young governor could benefit New Hampshire’s demographic trajectory. Sununu, at the age of 42, is currently the youngest governor in the United States.

“Symbolically, we also have a young governor who is focusing on economic development,” he said.

In his inauguration speech, Sununu said he was committed to reaching out to “100 companies in 100 days out-of-state to invite them in. You will not get all 100, but we will try. You can’t catch any fish if you don’t go fishing.”

“Even if none of that comes to fruition, you’re creating the symbolism that New Hampshire is a business-friendly and family-friendly place,” Norton said. “But as always, the devil is in the details. For many of the proposals he put forward, we’re going to have to wait and see how the legislative process defines them. There are a lot of potential impacts but we’ll have to wait and see what happens.”

The governor’s budget proposal is expected to go through many rewrites and changes in the next few months as it moves through the House and Senate. While he helps set policy, it’s up to the Legislature to decide what proposals will be funded.

There are a number of education, health care, and child care bills in front of the Legislature, but Norton said he’s not seeing legislation focusing on how to tackle the state’s demographic struggles. He is optimistic, though, since Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, introduced a bill creating a demographic study committee, who would make recommendations to lawmakers about how to tackle the aging problem in the state. It recently passed in the House and now it goes to the Senate.

Luczko said is also hopeful that communication between businesses, lawmakers, advocacy groups, and policy experts will improve as they work together on their mission of attracting young people.

“I cringe when we see duplication of efforts and someone starts a new effort that’s already being done,” she said. “There is a fine line between ‘the more the merrier,’ but then there’s something to say about being more effective if we combine resources and are more strategic about it.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.