HB456

Reject Amendment 25-0721h please.

The language contained in the following quote poses extremely dangerous consequences for the residents and visitors of NH should this legislation move forward. "15:5 Prohibited Activities. I. Except as provided in paragraph II, no recipient of a grant or appropriation of federal, state, or local funds may use the state funds to lobby or attempt to influence legislation, participate in political activity, or contribute funds to any entity engaged in these activities. II. Any recipient of a grant or appropriation of federal, state, or local funds that wishes to engage in any of the activities prohibited in paragraph I, or contribute funds to any entity engaged in these activities, shall segregate the state funds in such a manner that such funds are physically and financially separate from any non-state or non-local funds that may be used for any of these purposes. Funds shall not be commingled with local, state, or federal grants or appropriations. The mere bookkeeping separation of the state funds from other moneys shall not be sufficient." This language is a sweeping violation of both the United States and New Hampshire State Constitutions, and therefore should not be entertained at any time or in any length. Furthermore, this legislation will violate the national and state level principles of government without representation, allowing the legislative bodies to enact laws affecting the a wide range of people without allowing those people to speak in favor or against such legislation. It appears the intent is to prevent public officials from speaking for or against legislation, however the wording would apply to ordinary citizens that receive any public funding, to include assistance for needy families, tax credits, and other grant programs, essentially silencing a large portion of New Hampshire's population. I urge you to prevent this bill and any bill with this unconstitutional language from moving forward.

I am writing in opposition to the proposed amendment to HB 456. Much like the language from HB 314 before this proposed amendment appears to completely restrict the ability of certain professional associations and public officials from presenting to the legislature on specific, proposed legislation. I feel strongly that the NH legislation should not be restricting how a community may or may not appropriate and spend funds. How a community appropriates and spend fund should always be determined at the local level and if a grant request is written locally and awarded from a federal program, why does the NH legislature feel it should have authority over this grant money? The whole amendment reeks in its attempt to silence communities’ voices and a legislative intrusion into how towns and cities run their communities. If a community does not want to fund its participation in the NHMA or pay the dues for employees to be members of a professional organization, that community can and should remove said support from its budget. It should be a local control item.

This amendment is again a blatant attempt to silence public officials and their voluntary organizations from informing legislators regarding matters of importance to cities and towns in NH. The General Court should welcome the input of local officials on their concerns and experiences with issues facing the General Court and their constituents. Many constituents do not feel comfortable approaching state officials and instead confide to their local officials about issues important to them with the expectation that local officials will represent them before the General Court and other state agencies. Local officials also voluntarily join with other officials in associations to better communicate these concerns. This amendment removes that choice.

The non-germane amendment would make it difficult for public officials, non-profit organizations, and private citizens to make there views known to legislators.

I'm asking you the Administration to reject this amendment 25-072I incorporated which is in HB-456. This bill inhibits town officials from voicing our opinions, as a selectmen it hinders me in a way that the bill could stop our input on any issues.

I serve on our local Planning Board. The Municipal Association is an essential resource for our Board. Without it, our town attorney costs would likely more than double. The Municipal Association also provides critical training that is affordable and would be very difficult to replace. Their advice and training are necessary for practical and legal board action.

The amendment to this bill seems to preclude groups like the NH Municipal Association from direct interactions with town government. When I was a member of my town planning board, I relied on such organizations for advice and training. Volunteer boards need all the help they can find from experts, even if they are technically lobbyists. Please don’t pass a bill that interferes with the ability of town officials to gain expertise and advice. Sincerely, Hillary Nelson

While I understand the angst that some have towards lobbyist and potential pressure that may come from them, I believe that the benefit outweighs any negativity we all associate with the dreaded word LOBBYIST. As an ex-State Rep, I can’t tell you how invaluable it was to have to ability to have the information give to all of us from Lobbyists. I never took anything that any single group gave to me as gospel but it gave me a spring board to get a better feel and understanding for any complicated issue. The same is true for hearing from Municipal leaders throughout the state. We need to hear how a bill will affect even a single community. While I know regardless what others may say, being the best informed legislator takes a lot of hard work and given the number of bills that you have to read and understand you need content experts there at the ready to help give you information. While I agree you can’t take everything given to you at face value, it does allow you to start a conversation and begin your own research. I found that I may not have agreed with the data given to me but it often times gave me a new perspective and at least allowed me to see another side of the same coin. As legislators we want to do the best possible job but we can’t know everything on everything. A lobbyist while at times truly annoying can and will be your best resource which is why I really oppose any changes to current standards. The public as well as the legislators need to hear their testimony as we do from any Municipal leader, state legislator, or the general public. Please vote agains stifling freedom of speech by Lobbyists, municipal leaders or anyone as they try to provide information to the legislative body.. thank you for taking my testimony and allowing be to give it electronically. Being there in person is always the most effective way however, my husband is on his last days and while this is an extremely important issue, family will Always come first. Thank you again

This legislation is considered a non-germane, “replace all” amendment to HB 456 that allows the legislature to micromanage the speech and decision-making authority of local officials by limiting organizations like NHMA to providing “information” only to the legislature. The NHMA is an asset to municipalities around the state and serve an important roll in keeping local officials informed about what is going on in Concord that affects municipalities. Please do not support this HB 456 and vote it ITL. Thank you, Rick Hiland - Albany NH Selectman

I am voicing my personal opposition to the non-germane amendment (2025-0721h) to HB 456 and the efforts to limit the free speech of towns, cities, counties, school districts, and professional associations lobbying on behalf of these entities. These associations allow towns, cities, counties, and school districts to pool resources to stay abreast of legislative changes in Concord and advocate for responsible legislative change. These associations and lobbying activities also enhance efficient communication about the potential impact to towns, cities, counties, and school districts when a bill is going through the legislative process. In addition to providing valuable testimony during the legislative process, lobbyists funded by professional associations keep towns, cities, counties, and school districts apprised of new and changing legislation. A similar bill (HB 314) trying to limit the voice of towns, counties, and school districts was retained in committee earlier this year. If not for these associations, this non-germane “replace all” amendment would have gone unnoticed; all notifications through the house website appear to be based on the original bill. Finally, corporations have the ability to engage in the legislative process with registered lobbyists. Additionally, corporations and political action committees have the ability to influence the legislative process by donating to campaigns. Towns, cities, counties, and school districts should not be denied their voice or ability to lend their subject matter expertise during the legislative process.

I urge you to oppose this non-germane amendment to HB 456. Not only is introducing a non-germane amendment to this bill nontransparent, it is trying to reintroduce a bill that has already been held in committee. Though this may be something that can be done it does not make it right and is a very underhanded way of operating within the legislature. Moving passed the unethical means in which this amendment is being brought before the committee, the substance of the bill is harmful to NH and its citizens. As you know many bills get introduced annually and restricting advocacy makes it very difficult and expensive for Towns, Cities and other municipal officials to represent the communities in which they live and represent. This amendment prevents organizations such as the New Hampshire Association of Assessing Officials, the New Hampshire City and Town Clerks’ Association, the New Hampshire Tax Collectors’ Association, and the New Hampshire Municipal Association from representing their membership and all the residents that rely on these Towns and Officials to work on their behalf. Our State and Country was founded on having local officials either elected or appointed to represent the people. So what we are really talking about here is whether these officials can work collectively to share information or does each official need to close their offices and come individually to Concord in order to be heard. Not only would this be a burden on the taxpayers of NH, it would also limit the ability of peoples voices to be heard, which I do not believe is what the majority of the legislature wants to do. I thank you for your time to read my testimony and urge you to oppose this amendment.

David C. Noyes Director of Public Safety Waterville Valley Department of Public Safety 14 TAC Lane Waterville Valley, NH 03215 dnoyes@waterviilevalleynh.gov (603)-236-8809 X307 03/10/2025 Subject: Opposition to NH House Bill 456 Dear House Legislative Administration Committee, I am writing to express my strong opposition to New Hampshire House Bill 456, which allows the legislature to micromanage local officials' speech and decision-making authority by limiting organizations to provide "information only" to the legislature. While I understand the intent to ensure that public funds are used responsibly, this bill would have significant unintended consequences that could hinder the ability of municipalities, school districts, and other public entities to effectively advocate for the needs of their communities. As a Director of Public Safety in the Town of Waterville Valley, I have seen firsthand how participation in legislative discussions allows municipalities and public entities to provide critical input on policies that directly impact local governance, public safety, education, and infrastructure. HB 456 would severely restrict these efforts by preventing the use of public funds for any activity that could be deemed as lobbying or legislative influence, thereby silencing the voices of those responsible for implementing state laws and policies at the local level. Key concerns regarding HB 456 include: 1. Hindrance to Effective Advocacy: Municipalities, school boards, and public agencies rely on professional associations to represent their interests in Concord. These groups ensure that local governments have a seat at the table when decisions affecting public safety, education, and municipal operations are made. Eliminating this ability would leave local governments at a disadvantage compared to well-funded private interest groups. 2. Unintended Legal and Financial Consequences: The bill introduces significant penalties, including potential personal financial liability and criminal charges for those authorizing expenditures deemed in violation of the law. This creates an environment of fear and uncertainty, discouraging public officials from engaging in necessary discussions with legislators. 3. Overly Broad and Restrictive Language: The bill’s vague language regarding what constitutes lobbying or political activity could have a chilling effect on routine governmental operations. Even providing legislators with factual information about the local impacts of proposed legislation could be construed as lobbying, potentially leading to penalties. 4. Local Control and Decision-Making: Local governments and school districts should have the autonomy to use public funds to best serve their communities. HB 456 undermines local decision-making by imposing a one-size-fits-all restriction that fails to recognize the complexity of municipal governance. 5. Negative Impact on Public Services: By restricting municipalities' ability to engage in legislative advocacy, this bill could lead to laws and regulations that do not fully consider local needs, ultimately harming residents, students, and public safety. I urge you to oppose HB 456 and support the ability of public entities to responsibly engage with the legislative process. Ensuring that local voices are heard in Concord is essential to maintaining effective governance and responsive policymaking. Thank you for your time and consideration. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter further at your convenience. Sincerely, David C. Noyes Director of Public Safety Waterville Valley Department of Public Safety

Don't silence the organizations that care about our state!

Hello, I oppose this bill, or the replace all amendment to it. It would muzzle local officials from any form of advocacy, sharing of expertise, and educating the legislature on specific professional practices and policies that dictate the daily business of government. Those professionals who do the work related to bills passed in the legislature should have a way to voice their expertise on the matters. This bill would negatively impact local governments at all levels. It would negatively impact taxpayers, too. Nearly every new cost on municipalities or local governments are paid for by taxpayers in the form of increasing property taxes. Without local professional expertise, the legislature may not understand all fiscal impacts bills might have. This bill would also erode the trust that elected officials have previously had in the expertise of local officials, public employees, and those that carry out the jobs that bills passed by the legislature would impact. It would also reflect as taking away local control and input, as local officials would have no way of sharing their local points of view. This does not serve the people of New Hampshire, the taxpayers, or the local government entities in each community. On behalf of a professional that has worked directly for municipal and state government, works as a contractor in municipalities currently, and as a resident of Concord who is aware of property taxes and how they are calculated, I implore you to oppose this bill.

This bill would eliminate free speech from experts who represent local tax payers. This should have a companion bill that changes the state moto to "Only corporations live free"

As a town and school district moderator, I rely on organizations such as the NHMA to provide fair and unbalanced information. Legislators should not assume such organizations are simply self-serving but, if they do, then members are certainly wise enough to consider the source and respectfully disagree with the information.

On Friday, I learned that HB 314, the anti-speech bill targeting local school districts, government agencies and professional organizations like the NHASEA that was retained in committee just weeks ago, is trying to stage a comeback in Amendment 25-0721h, a non-germane, “replace all” amendment to HB 456. Again, lack of transparency and communication in an effort to spearhead an agenda that was properly reviewed in committee and determined not to move forward. An Amendment to HB 456 is an effort to be underhanded and push through an agenda that a committee studied and did not agree with. This is another shameful example of how representatives are attempting to undermine the important work of committees. I oppose HB456 and the non-germane amendment. The associations that are representing many towns have benefits that far exceed the small amount of money that is set aside for lobbying. The reality is that local school districts and municipalities receive free legal advice amongst other great benefits to many associations. The removal of this option will cause a substantial impact to local property taxes. If legal counsel on a policy document is needed - one will no longer be able to access the association for free assistance, rather they will need to pay legal to confirm that it meets the intended requirements. This will cause a substantial burden on the local municipality and school district. If the state is not going the fund the need for these services and hamstring local municipalities it is the constituents who will be hurt through their local property taxes. Lobbyists also bring to light information that representatives would be otherwise uneducated about. Passing this legislation will hurt local property taxpayers who are already bearing the burden of the continuous lack of state funding and downshifting of financial responsibilities to the local taxpayer. Please, I implore you, do not make it worse on us. Oppose HB456 and the non-germane amendment.

Testimony is for non germain, replace all amendment. Amendment 25-0721h would give both the house and senate complete powers and eliminate the valuable testimony of subject matter experts. The original bill was retained in committee. This attempt is only proving that the sponsors of the original bill are trying to push and agenda and remove the voice of the people.

The proposed amendment allows the legislature to micromanage the speech and decision-making authority of local officials by limiting organizations like the New Hampshire Municipal Association to providing “information” only to the legislature, while prohibiting such organizations from registering a position, The amendment is a hampering of local efficiency that would lead to one of two outcomes: Less local government perspective and input in the legislative process or more time for local officials spent away from their regular duties to follow and engage in the process. Either result is to the detriment of local governments and their taxpayers especially since the private sector would continue to lobby for their interests as the local governments’ voice and perspective diminish. The amendment also explicitly prevents lobbying by the New Hampshire Association of Assessing Officials and the New Hampshire City and Town Clerks’ Association and the New Hampshire Tax Collectors’ Association and contains the same prohibitions on organizations receiving local, state, or federal funds . This bill is not in the best interests of the public.

please reject the non germane amendment. Not fair to towns and cities!!

Please reject Non-Germane Amendment 25-0712h. That amendment tries yet again to limit the rights of NHMA and other associations from advocating for their members. Until you also limit the lobbying rights of PSNH, other Utilities, the Power Generators and other "business" lobbyists, you should not limit the free speech of the municipalities via their Associations. The funding for these associations are approved by the voters of each municipality and their elected local representatives. Thank you for your time and service to our State. Christopher L. Boldt, Esq.

The State's attempt to strip its municipalities of the right to have their interests represented is mind boggling. The only level of government that truly serves its constituents' interests is the municipal level. Why is the State of New Hampshire trying to take away our freedom to represent our citizens? Please kill this bill.