04 June 2010
Overview
We have all been paying attention to the news lately, it’s covered healthcare, taxes, LLC’s, and spending cuts to name a few. The state unemployment rate remains around 7% although it is reported that Massachusetts and New Hampshire are out of the recession and it seems the campaign season has begun a bit early this year with the deluge of ads we’re seeing and hearing in the media. In this issue, I am focusing a few topics to which I have received inquiries from you. I welcome your input into future topics that are of interest to the community.
Reconsideration
A few residents have asked me about the reconsideration process on house bills. At the state house, we follow the Mason’s Rules of Legislative Procedure. This manual provides the course to how meetings are conducted. Votes are done democratically with majority rule. However, there are procedures for “undoing” things in the house if necessary. One means is the reconsideration process which is asking the body to vote on a question again.
After a vote on a bill is taken, mainly through roll call where our votes on individually recorded, one who voted on the prevailing side may request to reconsider - in other words ask to vote again on the question. The house then asks if we want to vote on that bill again- that itself is a reconsideration vote. If we vote in favor of reconsideration, we then vote again on the same question on the same bill, possibly with a different outcome. Reconsideration may be done because a member voted in error and wants to be on record with a correct vote or reconsideration is done to lock in a vote, especially close votes so the house cannot vote again on a bill. Even if a vote is reconsidered and voted on again, the initial vote will still be part of the permanent record. In the state house, if one voted on the losing side, the member cannot ask for reconsideration. Additionally, reconsideration is a non-debatable motion. The rules we use on a local level can be different based upon what is adopted at the beginning of the town meetings. The process is better understood in action versus on paper. I am happy to offer further explanation of the process.
Recent House Bills
It is a challenge to choose a few bills to write about given the volume we hear. Most of the large spending and cutting bills are covered by the media daily, so I will highlight a few bills that are of local concern.
Bully bill In March, the house passed a bill that was dubbed the “bully bill” by a voice vote. This bill, HB1523 revises the statute on pupil safety and violence prevention to include harassment, intimidation, bullying, and cyber bullying. There currently is ‘Pupil safety and violence prevention act’ in statute already, this bill further clarifies what bullying is; the steps to respond to such an act; and adds cyber bullying to the statute which includes electronic devices. . The purpose of this bill is to provide stronger guidelines to the public schools for improving policies and procedures. Some might argue that this is nanny state legislation or unnecessary government involvement . I maintain that if mandated that would be true but this is about the definitions of bullying and the protection of our children, which we all deem important. We are fortunate that our school already has bullying policies in place and this legislation would help our school understand their role and responsibility.
Delinquent Property Tax Interest Rates The house passed a bill (HB 1335) that would allow a local governing body to set the interest rate on late and delinquent property tax payments, subsequent payments, and other unpaid taxes. Simply said, instead of having to pay 12% if you are late in paying your property taxes, the interest is halved to 6%. Subsequently, if a lien is placed on your property, the current interest rate of 18% would be halved down to 9%. This legislation, if made into law, would enable us locally to determine if we want to lower the rates. I felt this is good legislation in returning local control. The opposition was concerned that cities and towns who count on the property taxes would need to borrow funds to cover the delinquent amounts owed. This is a valid concern, however, the municipal rate at which our town would borrow is between 1.5% and 2%, well below the 6% at which the town would receive.
Right to Know The Rockingham county sheriif resigned last November and statute requires a replacement. This event triggered a bill by a fellow Rockingham representative, with good reason. HB 1687 sought to clarify vagueness in the voting method used to elect a replacement for county office. The current statute 91:A often referred to as the “Right to Know” provision states, “all meetings, whether held in person, by means of telephone or electronic communication, or in any other manner, shall be open to the public. Except for town meetings, school district meetings, elections, no vote while in open session may be taken by secret ballot.” HB 1687 sought to amend this language and insert “and county conventions when voting to fill a vacancy in county offices under RSA 661:9, I,” after ‘elections’ to include the county conventions as exempt. The delegates (state representatives) could legally hold a secret ballot election if “The members of the county convention may by a vote of the convention use a secret ballot to fill such a vacancy” language is added by passage of HB1687.
In my opinion, the matter of voting replacement county officials is important. The position of county sheriff is elected directly by the people for good reason. The sheriff office has substantial power and ought to be held accountable by the voters. In the case where a replacement needs to be selected, we ought to use the process that is most transparent. If state representatives are charged with the responsibility of voting on a replacement, then the process ought to be visible so that they can be held accountable by the voters. While secret ballot for an individual is the law, as an elected representative voting on behalf of citizens, shouldn’t you know how I vote when it comes to filling a position that you would normally elect? The full article on HB1687 is available at www.pamtucker.org.
Though it has since failed in the house, I feel HB1687 has merits in that it brought to light vagueness within our current law. I am planning on working to clarify the process by which we elect a replacement and the compelling language within the statute.
The Light at Bayside/ Winnicut Road and Route 33
My last conversation with the Department of Transportation has the light at the intersection of Route 33 and Bayside/Winnicut Road scheduled for completion by August this summer. The bids have gone out and we should see work beginning on the intersection this spring. I will post any updates I receive to my website.
Testifying in Concord
Our state is unique in that every bill that is introduced by a house member and goes to committee will eventually make it to the house floor. Given the amount of bills that are introduced each session, it is very important that the committees thoroughly vet a bill prior to making a recommendation to the full house. It is during these committee hearings that the house and senate need information on the potential impact of a particular bill. The New Hampshire process is designed for the citizenry to participate in the committee sessions. Some residents have felt strongly enough about upcoming legislation to travel to Concord to speak in committee hearings. If you would like to go to Concord to speak, I would be happy to assist you in speaking at a hearing- be it what to expect, the proper procedures during the hearings or just getting around Concord. I thank those of you who have contacted me regarding bills and I have taken your comments into consideration before voting. Please let me know how I may further be of assistance to you in Concord. My email is pamzt@comcast.net and my voting record is online at www.gencourt.nh.state.us. Thank you.