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

Full-Day Kindergarten Makes It Out of Conference Committee. Drinking Water Bill Dies.

On the last day of conference committee work in the New Hampshire State House, a deal was reached to fund full-day kindergarten, but a bill aimed to improve water quality standards stalled in committee.

A last-minute deal was reached Thursday between GOP members of the House and Senate on using revenue from the lottery game Keno to fund the legislature’s plan for full-day kindergarten, but Democrats no longer support the bill. They say it doesn’t fully fund the program for all cities and towns and local communities are going to be left to pick up the bill. Exactly how much the state would spend per-pupil will depend on how much revenue is raised from taxing Keno.

The amendment presented by Sen. Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, guarantees school districts that want full-day kindergarten an extra $1,100 per kindergarten pupil. The state currently offers school districts an “adequacy grant” for half-day kindergarten of $1,800 per student, which is half of the $3,600 for students in grades 1-12. About 75 percent of the school districts in the state have already adopted full-day kindergarten using local property taxes to pay for it.

Democrats wanted the second half day of kindergarten to be fully funded at $1,800 per student in exchange for support on legalizing and regulating Keno. However, Republicans were cautious to do that out of concern that Keno would not generate enough revenue to support the full amount.

The amendment guarantees that at least $1,100 will go to funding full-day kindergarten since they are confident enough Keno revenue will be raised to do that. The state will fully fund the program at $1,800 if Keno revenues are enough. If not, the grants will be pro-rated per community at an amount between $1,100 and $1,800 depending on the exact amount that is raised from Keno.

Gov. Chris Sununu has made full-day kindergarten a priority for his first term in the Corner Office. While funding negotiations have constantly changed over the past few months in the State House, he applauded the deal lawmakers made and said it was a “first step” in getting the program fully funded.

“This is not a time for partisan politics, we need to get this done,” he said in a statement. “This is one of the most transformative pieces of legislation, and more progress for kindergarten than this state has ever seen.  As revenues increase, the amount of funding can increase for kids. It is not only a first step, it is a real plan that funds full-day kindergarten across every community in this state.”

But Democrats say this isn’t the deal they agreed on. Senate Democrats called it a “shell game.”

“Senate Democrats have been leading on Kindergarten for years, and we are glad Governor Sununu has at least attempted to follow our example. But, today’s failure to support full-day kindergarten like any other grade while giving even more tax cuts for the wealthy elite is a major disappointment and once again demonstrates Governor Sununu’s failure to lead,” said Senate Minority Leader Jeff Woodburn.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Steve Marchand called the “kenogarten” policy “disingenuous.”

Former 2016 Democratic gubernatorial nominee Colin Van Ostern was active on Twitter to express his disappointment that the deal reached in the conference committee didn’t guarantee full funding of kindergarten at the $1,800 level.

The full-day kindergarten bill is expected to pass in the House and Senate next week.

A separate bill that would lead to stronger standards for a toxic chemical in more than 200 communities’ drinking water ultimately died in committee.

The bill would have required the Department of Environmental Services to set a standard for a group of chemicals known as perfluorochemicals or PFCs. The state currently uses the federal government recommendation of 70 parts per trillion, but other states have set tougher standards.

The conference committee couldn’t agree on the bill due to concerns that it could require towns to make expensive upgrades to their water systems. The defeat of the bill in the legislative session saw both Republicans and Democrats disappointed that it failed.

“I am very disappointed House Republicans rejected drinking water standards that protect the public health, particularly prenatal and early childhood health,” said Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord. “Just like on the budget, Republicans have caved to the know-it-all wealthy elite and big corporations at the expense of everyday Granite Staters – folks who just want clean drinking water for them and their children.”

According to recent research from the Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University, New Hampshire is tied with Alabama as having the second worst PFC contamination of drinking water in the country.

Sen. Dan Innis, R-New Castle — a sponsor of the bill — said it was a “common sense piece of legislation.”

“I am deeply disappointed that the House was unwilling to come to an agreement to better protect the citizens of my district and around the state from the growing concern about the quality of our drinking water,” he said. “This critical legislation will be the first bill that I file in the fall. It is imperative that we quickly come to an agreement to address this pressing issue for the Granite State.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

What’s Funded in the Senate Finance Committee’s Budget?

The Senate Finance Committee finished crafting its version of the state budget on Wednesday. It largely resembles what Gov. Chris Sununu proposed in February, except for new business tax cuts and a multimillion dollar investment in mental health services.

The committee voted 4-2 along party lines to approve a two-year, $11.8 billion state budget. Republicans believe the spending is conservative enough and tackles important issues facing the state, such as the mental health crisis. Democrats argue the budget doesn’t focus enough on higher education, public health, and workforce training initiatives.

“It’s a solid budget that provides what New Hampshire needs,” said Senate President Chuck Morse. “We certainly have had lists of things that we couldn’t fund, like increased funding for the university system, that we just can’t get to in this budget if we’re going to live within our means.”

One of the biggest differences between Sununu’s proposal and the Senate Finance Committee’s spending plan is the cut in the state’s business profits tax (BPT) and business enterprise tax (BET). Sununu’s budget didn’t include them.

Under the measure, the BPT would drop to 7.7 percent in 2019 and 7.5 in 2021. Meanwhile, the state’s BET would fall to 0.6 percent in 2019 and 0.5 percent in 2021.

“The budget passed by the Senate Finance Committee does not increase or create any new taxes or fees and relies on realistic revenue projections,” said Senate Finance Chair Gary Daniels. “The budget also addresses our state’s top priorities including providing resources for those most in need. This budget also includes additional business tax cuts and increases small businesses’ ability to make capital investments. This allows businesses in New Hampshire to create good paying jobs and grow their business, keeping our state competitive with other states in New England and nationally.”

The two Democrats on the committee, Dan Feltes of Concord and Lou D’Allesandro of Manchester, voted against the budget, saying several necessary programs are underfunded.

“This budget fails to fully fund full-day kindergarten, fails to fully fund our efforts to combat the opioid epidemic, and fails to adequately meet the needs of those suffering from mental illness,” D’Allesandro said. “Make no mistake, this is not the budget I wanted and I will continue to work to ensure that the critical needs of the people of New Hampshire are met.”

The Senate Finance Committee’s budget leaves out money for full-day kindergarten, which Sununu included in his proposal. Those funds, though, are part of a separate bill making its way through the Legislature.

The budget also calls for more than $17 million in spending to increase the number of mental health beds and expand mental health services. That measure was not in Sununu’s budget, but he supports it. It also increases funding for additional social workers and supervisors in the Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF). The Alcohol Fund is seeing an allocation of 3.4 percent of revenues, which is up from 1.7 percent in the current budget.

“We addressed our state’s most critical needs, including programs to benefit families with a disabled child and adding 60 new beds and community treatment options to relieve the growing mental health problem,” Daniels said. “We also doubled the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Substance Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Recovery to bring new resources into our communities combating the heroin crisis. We also made sweeping changes to the leadership at the Division of Children, Youth and Families and added more caseworkers to ensure our kids’ best interests are being taken care of and they are protected abuse and neglect harm.”

The Senate Finance Committee budget also approves the use of $2 million in unspent money from the 2017 Alcohol Fund for renovations and construction of a youth substance abuse treatment wing at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. An allocation of $250,000 per year for sexual and domestic violence prevention programs was also approved, along with $1 million in funding for 13 rape and domestic violence crisis centers operated by the N.H. Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence.

Despite these additions, Feltes said the Senate GOP budget doesn’t reflect the needs of Granite Staters.

“This budget fails to include job training programs that would boost our workforce and close our skills gap, breaks promises made to our retirees and increases health care costs for our seniors,” he said. “It fails to live up to our obligations to Granite Staters living with disabilities by failing to fund our developmental disability waitlist and does not adequately deal with childhood mental health. And it fails to provide resources to reform DCYF and protect our most vulnerable children. Quite simply, this budget fails to adequately address the critical and time-sensitive challenges facing our state.”

The budget go the Senate floor for a vote. Usually, after the full Senate approves of its budget, the Senate and House confer to iron out differences between the two budgets. However, the House was unable to pass a budget this year. After the Senate approves of the budget, it will ultimately need to be approved by the full House.

The real test of the budget will be in the lower chamber, after conservative members sided with Democrats to sink the House GOP leadership’s plan last month. They cited an increase in spending and lack of tax cuts as reasons for opposing the budget. With BPT and BET tax cuts, it’s possible they might support the Senate’s plan, which included several provisions from the House budget.

If the state budget makes it through the House, it will head to the governor’s desk for his signature. The whole process needs to be done by the end of the fiscal year on June 30.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

 

 

NH Legislature On Brink of Passing Funding Bill for Landlords to Tackle Lead In Homes

Millions of Americans are at risk of lead exposure from paint in their homes and in their drinking water. In New Hampshire, it’s been found that lead poisoning affects about 1,000 children under 6 years old in the state every year. The Legislature wants to allocate funding to combat the crisis, but it will prove to be difficult to settle on an appropriate cost.

Senate Bill 247 would essentially give landlords money to get rid of lead in apartments across the state. The bill doesn’t change the lead levels, 10 micrograms per deciliter, that require landlords to test for lead in their apartments with children, but it does require universal testing for children between the ages of 1 and 2 to be covered by insurance companies. The early warning level is still at 3 micrograms, the level at which landlords would be notified so they could take action before reaching the 10-microgram level.

If the test reveals that areas of the rented property contain lead, the landlord can be forced to remove the lead contamination, which is known as abatement. The rules are mostly for rented properties, but they also apply to owner-occupied homes. However, homeowners cannot be forced to carry out abatements and are only given recommendations.

The bill also contains a provision that would bar children 6 years old and younger from attending any private or public school, or child care, unless their parents can prove their kids received lead testing. Blood tests of children under 6 years old in rental properties that reveal lead levels of 10 micrograms or higher can prompt an investigation by the state Division of Public Health Services.

With more tests, it’s likely there will be more lead found in homes across the state, forcing landlords to get rid of the lead either as a requirement or a precaution if it approaches the maximum level.

To help with those costs, the bill would set aside $3 million for the next two years to reimburse landlords for 75 percent of abatement cost, and possibly the total cost if the property owner can demonstrate financial need. It would also cover the cost of a filter if there is lead in the water.

The bill passed with bipartisan support in the Senate (15-7) in March and in the House (233-109) on Thursday. It now sits in the House Finance Committee where lawmakers will decide on the ultimate cost of the bill since it uses state revenues.

Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord, testified before the committee on Tuesday, saying “we need to get out in front of this” because the state is “robbing children of future earnings…as a result of where they live.”

Yet, he admitted the cost of fixing the state’s lead problem could range between $3 to $100 million. This was a concern other lawmakers had, like Reps. J.R. Hoell, R-Weare, and Jim Fedolfi, R-Hillsborough.

Fedolfi told the House Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs earlier this month that it should be the landlord’s responsibility to pay for it and not the taxpayers. He called it a “landlord recovery bill,” allowing owners to “refurbish their apartments on the state’s dime” and a “free ticket for the landlord who is getting rich and doing well and now using our money to help them.”

Yet, this is a national problem that has received increased attention after the Flint, Mich. water crisis. About 100,000 people across the country get their drinking water from utilities that found high lead, but didn’t treat the water to remove it. Also, 4 million Americans got water from small operators who skipped required tests required by federal safe drinking water laws, according to a 2016 investigation by USA Today.

About 77 million people across all 50 states were served by water systems reporting violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act in 2015, according to a report issued last week by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

While most of media reports are focused on lead in drinking water, which is still a major issue in most states, people often forget that lead paint in older homes still poses a threat to children.

“The public doesn’t hear about it because most kids have no symptoms until years later when the brain damage caused by early lead exposure appears,” wrote Amy Winslow, president and CEO of medical device company Magellan Diagnostics in a Monday op-ed in the Concord Monitor. “It shows up when kids can’t perform on grade-level reading or math tests, and can’t sit still in school, at which point no one is thinking about lead.”

The state has the oldest housing stock in the country. Approximately 68 percent of homes in the state were built before 1968, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

In the bill, landlords of any property built before 1978, the year lead paint was first outlawed, would pay for repairs and would be required to conduct annual checks on the interior and exterior of their properties.

The House Finance Committee did not reach a funding agreement on Tuesday. They are scheduled to work on the bill beginning on Wednesday, but it’s expected to take some time before they come to a consensus on the cost. It would then go back to the House for a full vote.

Follow Kyle on Twitter.

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

Senator Presents Ambitious Proposal For More Affordable Housing in NH

When Sen. Dan Feltes, D-Concord, introduced a bill Wednesday, he sought a $25 million appropriation to the state’s affordable housing fund. Instead, he’s walking away with $5 million at best.

Senate Bill 94 would have put $25 million in the NH Housing Finance Authority’s Affordable Housing Fund to do what its name suggests — create more affordable housing for Granite Staters.

“This is a competitiveness issue,” Feltes testified before the Senate Capital Budget Committee. “We have to think about housing. I think, quite frankly, if there is one bill that’s a top priority, this is it. We have to do something right now and something significant.”

This funding mechanism isn’t anything new. It’s been around since its creation in 1988, under former Republican Gov. John H. Sununu, to be a revolving loan fund that provides low-interest loans and grants to build, rehabilitate, or acquire affordable housing. It’s first appropriation was $4.5 million. Since then, there have only been a few times when the Legislature has added cash to the fund. The fund didn’t see another dime until 2002, when $5 million was added to it.

In 2007, during Democratic Gov. John Lynch’s administration, approximately $750,000 was given to the fund. In 2015, $800,000 was added, and in 2016 $2 million was appropriated, but that money was earmarked for housing for people with substance use disorders.

The appropriation last year came to fruition on Tuesday where city and state officials broke ground for the Families in Transition’s Family Willows Substance Use Treatment Center and Recovery Housing in Manchester. The expanded treatment center and recovery housing focuses on women, and mothers with children dealing with the opioid crisis. It’s expected to provide treatment for about 400 women. Gov. Chris Sununu and U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan attended the groundbreaking ceremony.

Feltes said the lack of funding for affordable housing is a “workforce, jobs, and competitiveness issue.” Testimony from leading experts on affordable housing in the state said all three areas are connected and important for New Hampshire’s future.

Without affordable housing in the state, people have trouble finding a place to live and workers end up living farther away from their jobs. Sometimes that’s too much for employees, so companies are left with an inadequate workforce, and without a strong workforce, or affordable housing, the state won’t be able to convince businesses to come and set up shop.

“You’ll hear about how we need a stronger workforce and affordable housing to keep the young working families that are demographically and economically needed as we move forward,” Feltes said.

Feltes is right. Lawmakers have heard testimony and had meetings from advocacy groups, government agencies, and political experts on how New Hampshire’s aging population will impact housing, transportation, and health care costs.

Already, workers are feeling the crunch of high housing costs, spending approximately 60 to 75 percent of their income on housing each month, according to Elissa Margolin, director of Housing Action NH, a coalition of organizations and businesses advocating for expanded workforce and affordable housing options.

Currently, the statewide median rent in New Hampshire is approximately $1,206 a month, she said, which is a 15 percent increase from five years ago. The vacancy rate, a factor in what’s driving the rising rents, is at 2 percent statewide and about 1 percent near the larger job centers.

The Granite State has already fallen behind the rest of New England and most of the country in terms of providing funding for affordable housing.

Rhode Island voters recently approved a $50 million bond for their state’s housing trust fund. They previously issued a $25 million bond in 2012 and a $50 million bond in 2006. Vermont uses a percentage of their real estate transfer tax for its housing trust fund, which is about $9 million a year.

In Maine, which has a similar population size to New Hampshire and similar workforce challenges, regularly funds its trust fund through their real estate transfer tax, with about $6 million invested annually. In 2009, a $50 million bond was approved, followed by another $15 million bond in 2015.

Connecticut and Massachusetts have also recently appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars a year to affordable housing.

Dean Christon, executive director of NH Housing Finance Authority, said the fund gives them “a lot of flexibility into how these dollars are being used.” They can be spent on housing from homeless shelters to senior housing to workforce rental housing.

David Juvet, senior vice president of public policy for the NH Business and Industry Association, said for the businesses he talks to, workforce and housing are the top issue for them.

When asked by Sen. David Watters, D-Dover, if the state should have “some skin in the game,” he responded that “there is some legitimate policy reason why the state should be involved with helping to assist economic development.”

The issue of affordable housing, workforce development, and business competitiveness of the state is usually a bipartisan issue. Everyone wants to see New Hampshire succeed. Affordable housing, especially when it comes to providing relief for the substance abuse crisis, also receives bipartisan support.

The bill only had Democratic support though, including Senate Democratic Leader Jeff Woodburn and House Democratic Leader Steve Shurtleff.

So why aren’t Republicans jumping on board? Well, it’s most likely the price tag of the legislation — $25 million can be a hard sell. During the hearing, Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley asked a witness if they would the measure if it were a different amount.

The committee also has to tackle a more pressing issue with the unanticipated charge costing the state millions of dollars to convert several state-owned buildings to natural gas after Concord Steam Corp. announced plans to close this year. The Senate Capital Budget Committee will her testimony on that bill in the coming weeks.

Ultimately, the committee unanimously voted on an amendment to changed the $25 million appropriation to the Affordable Housing Fund to only $5 million, and then they recommended that the bill “ought to pass” when it goes to the Senate soon.

Some activists say any little bit can help “move the needle” some more.

“We need the state’s oar int he water to help steer the ship,” said Evelyn Whelton of the Mount Washington Valley Housing Coalition. “A small push at the state level would influence housing growth and send a signal to businesses and those who want to move here, that we are engaged in economic development and are serious about it.”

Follow Kyle on Twitter.