CI Header

Sponsored By

 
 
SPBG 
 
Cap Group 

Editorial Board

 
Brad Cook
Sheehan Phinney
Bass + Green

Bruce Berke
Sheehan Phinney
Capitol Group 
 
Valerie Acres
Sheehan Phinney
Capitol Group 

Henry Veilleux
Sheehan Phinney
Capitol Group

Erle Pierce
Sheehan Phinney
Capitol Group
Michael Skelton
Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce
michaels@manchester-chamber.org
 
Welcome to Capitol Insight 
 
Sponsor Insight
 
Ooops, they did it again.
 
The revenue sources that the House is now considering consist primarily of tax increases.  After last year when the legislature increased more than 40 taxes and fees with all of the political heat it took for doing so, it is surprising that the House leadership is again considering a multitude of tax increases rather pursuing other options. 

Included in the taxes reviewed these last two weeks are an increase in the tobacco tax; an electric or power generation tax; a tax on nuclear fuel; a tax on second homes; a tax on capital gains; repealing a reduction in the insurance premium tax; a increase in the beer tax; an increase in the gas tax; an education income tax; an estate tax; and an increase in pet shop license fees.  On Thursday, the House Ways & Means Committee took "straw" votes and made recommendations on these proposals.  Not all of the tax increases were recommended but interestingly, of those that were, they all had party line votes with the Democrats voting to recommend more and higher taxes and the Republicans opposed. The biggest fear is more taxes and not enough down sizing of government. 

The Legislature finds itself in this position as a result of increased spending over the last four years when every indicator during that period was saying to slow down because of the struggling economy.  Now with this $220m+ budget deficit looming in a non-budget year but with elections six months away, the political impact of these and other decisions over the next few weeks will be interesting to observe.

While not all of these tax proposals will be enacted by the close of the session, it is a very poignant example of these legislators too easily turning to taxes rather than making the necessary cuts to the budget.

Legislature Looks to Study State Contracting Practices
 
In these economic times anything the state can do to ensure it is receiving the greatest value for its dollar is good for the taxpayers of the state.  And second, any procedures or criteria that can be developed to help New Hampshire's business community be eligible for some new business is always a good direction.
 
LLC Repeal Recommended by Key Committee
         
The effort to repeal the so-called "LLC" tax has to some degree received support from the three players in the process.  The Senate has passed a bill repealing the measure; the Governor has publicly endorsed the repeal and included it as a part of his deficit reduction package, and now the House Ways & Means Committee has endorsed the measure (15-5) in its recommendations to the House Finance Committee as they review the components of Senate Bill 450.  While a good step in the right direction, the issue of defining reasonable compensation is not as likely to pass this year and will be studied in the future.

Bruce Berke
Sheehan Phinney Capitol Group 
 
Chamber Insight 
 
State Budget Potpourri
 
As detailed above, the House Ways and Means committee trotted out a slew of new taxes last week intended to help meet the state's current budget deficit. Many of these proposals were rejected as part of last year's budget and have little support in the Senate, yet are back again for another go around.
 
The Chamber, along with a chorus of other business groups, will be very active over the next few weeks reminding lawmakers that most of these proposals failed to pass muster in the legislature last year and that new or increased taxes will only further erode New Hampshire's ability to position itself as a business friendly state.
 
State's 10 Year Highway Plan in Senate
 
The State's 10 Year Highway Plan will be heard in the Senate Transportation Committee this week. This massive plan covers all the major infrastructure projects on the state's radar for the next 10 years. The Governor and Executive Council have already blessed the plan and it's now up to the legislature to give a final review.
 
The Chamber will be closely following the Senate's action on the plan and focusing on two issues: tolls and rail.  As you may have seen in the news, the NH DOT has suggested the possibility of relocating the Bedford tolls to in front of the Airport Access Road off ramp. This relocation would result in Manchester Boston Regional Airport in being one of only a handful of airports in the country will a tolled entrance. Needless to say, this is not a good idea given the Airport's $1.2 billion annual economic impact.
 
With regard to rail, the House attached a provision to the 10 Year Plan requiring the legislature approve the budget of any rail service prior to the receipt of federal funds. This provision is unnecessary and is more red tape aimed at slowing down the rail project.
 
Solar Project in Reverse
 
The Manchester Solar Project took a step backwards last week as the House Science Technology and Environment Committee voted SB 334 "inexpedient to legislate." While it was clear from the get go SB 334 was not popular among committee members, it was surprising that there apparently was no room for compromise with committee leadership. Despite 8+ hours of testimony no committee work session was held, which deprived members the opportunity to publicly discuss potential compromise solutions.
 
The fight for SB 334 is not over yet, however. Expect a floor fight on this issue this week. In addition, the Senate will likely choose to amend a House bill currently in the Senate by adding the text of SB 334, thus providing another legislative vehicle that can move the Manchester Solar project forward.
 
The Chamber supports SB 334 (or similar language) as it makes an ideal project a reality and clearly is an effective and efficient use of RPS funds. New Hampshire has a long way to go to reach its obligation to produce 25% of its energy from renewable sources by 2025 (mandated by the RPS law). As long as the State keeps dragging its feet on reaching these goals, all ratepayers will continue to pay into a penalty into a program known as the renewable energy fund. If the legislature is serious about meeting this obligation, it should not be saying no to proposals like SB 334
 
Michael Skelton
Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce
michaels@manchester-chamber.org