New Hampshire Town and City, November/December 2024 by New Hampshire Municipal Association

Beyond investing

The New Hampshire Public Deposit Investment Pool (NH PDIP) has provided public entities with investment options since 1993. NH PDIP focuses on safety, liquidity, and a competitive yield in order to meet the distinct needs of cities, towns, school districts, and other political subdivisions.

This information is for institutional investor use only, not for further distribution to retail investors, and does not represent an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any fund or other security. Investors should consider the Pool’s investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses before investing in the Pool. This and other information about the Pool is available in the Pool’s current Information Statement, which should be read carefully before investing. A copy of the Pool’s Information Statement may be obtained by calling 1-844-464-7347 or is available on the NHPDIP website at www.nhpdip.com. While the Pool seeks to maintain a stable net asset value of $1.00 per share, it is possible to lose money investing in the Pool. An

in the Pool is not

or any

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Candace Bouchard - Vice Chair Supervisor of the Checklist, Concord

Laura BuonoImmediate Past Chair Town Administrator, Hillsborough

David Caron Town Administrator, Derry Shelagh Connelly Conservation Commission, Holderness

Phil D’Avanza Planning Board, Goffstown

Stephen Fournier Town Manager, Newmarket

Elizabeth Fox - Chair

Asst. City Manager, HR Director, Keene

David Stack Town Manager, Bow

Neil Irvine Town Administrator, Northwood

Patrick Long Alderman, Manchester

Cheryl Lindner - Treasurer Finance Director, Bow

Conner MacIver Town Administrator, Barrington

Judie Milner City Manager, Franklin

Jim MaggioreImmediate Past Vice Chair Select Board Member, North Hampton

Dale Girard Mayor, Claremont

Michael Malaguti Town Administrator, Londonderry

Jim Michaud Chief Assessor, Hudson

Dennis Shanahan Deputy Mayor, Dover

Holly Larsen Finance Director/Tax Collector, Berlin

Joanne Haight Select Board Chair, Sandwich

Donna Mombourquette Energy Commission, New Boston

Jeanie Forrester - Secretary Select Board Member, Meredith

Joseph R. Devine Assistant Town Manager, Salem

Shaun Mulholland City Manager, Lebanon

Bonnie Ham Planning Board Chair, Woodstock

A Message from the

Executive Director NHMA

Margaret

M.L.Byrnes

When this issue of Town & City goes to print on November 1, NHMA staff will be recovering from our Halloweenthemed annual conference! This was the first year NHMA held the conference in October, and we hope all the local officials, exhibitors, sponsors, and presenters who joined us had a memorable and worthwhile (and somewhat spooky) experience.

Are you ready for another legislative session? Well . . . ready or not, here it comes! The first filing period for LSRs (legislative services requests) came and went in September, and there will be another filing period in November following the election. NHMA government affairs staff are already preparing for the session—and have been since the end of the last session—but, as always, we need your help. We want to remind you of the importance of communicating with your representatives and senator about important issues in your community and legislation that affects municipal government. After the election is a great time to reconnect or introduce yourself to your legislators and to make them aware of NHMA’s Legislative Policies and Principles, which were adopted by the membership in September at the Legislative Policy Conference.

Finally, as we head into 2025, NHMA is proud that implementation of its 2024 – 2027 strategic plan is underway. We have been sharing details about the plan in Town & City and Newslink for the past several months. Take a look at pages 24 and 25 of this issue for NHMA’s strategic priorities for the next three years.

See you in the new year!

Warmest regards,

Margaret M.L. Byrnes, NHMA Executive Director

HAPPENINGS

officials from across the state finalized the policies and principles that will guide NHMA's legislative efforts for 2025-2026. These policies focus on preserving local government authority while advocating for increased efficiency and discretion for municipalities. NHMA also reaffirmed its commitment to a strong state-local partnership to address key issues affecting communities.

Telecommunica�ons

Tax Assessment

Eminent Domain

We represent towns and ci�es throughout the state and bring value to our clients through decades of experience and adhering to the budgetary constraints under which municipali�es operate. We emphasize preven�ve and �mely legal counsel to our clients with a view toward avoiding problems that result in li�ga�on.

Special counsel services include:

Appellate

Labor & Employment

Also available for con

Water

Growth Control

Land Use & Planning

ict counsel services

For inquiries please contact Christopher Boldt or Sharon Somers

lity & Infrastructure

Police

Environmental

566‐

Upcoming Events

For more information or to register for an event, visit our online Calendar of Events at www.nhmunicipal.org. If you have any questions, please contact us at registrations@nhmunicipal.org.

NOVEMBER

NH/VT Cybersecurity Summit

9:00 am – 5:00 pm Thursday, November 7

Woodstock Inn & Resort, 14 The Green, Woodstock, VT, 05091

Veteran’s Day (NHMA offices closed) Monday, November 11

2024 Municipal Land Use Law Conference

9:00 am – 3:15 pm Saturday, November 16

Southern New Hampshire University, Dining Center Banquet Hall, 2500 North River Road, Manchester, NH 03106

Thanksgiving Day

(NHMA offices closed) Thursday, November 28

Day after Thanksgiving Day (NHMA offices closed) Friday, November 29

DECEMBER

NHMA Board of Directors Meeting

9:30 am – 12:00 pm Friday, December 20

Christmas Day (NHMA offices closed) Wednesday, December 25

Please visit NHMA's website @ www.nhmunicipal.org frequently for the most up-to-date event and training information. Thank you.

The Bond Bank’s Next Bond Issue will be on July 10, 202

Check our website www.nhmbb.org for interest rate results

Are you planning a capital project for

We can assist you with your planning by providing various scenarios based on level debt or level principal payments for different terms. Contact us now for your estimated debt schedules.

To schedule a meeting, obtain debt service schedules, or for details about our schedule, fees, Bond Anticipation Note programs, and current interest rates, please contact Tammy J. St. Gelais, Executive Director, at tstgelais@nhmbb.com.

Are you planning a capital

you navigate challenges –including Human Resource and Legal matters,

and Response, and much more.

know your needs are evolving, and so are we.

We can assist you with your planning by providing various scenarios based on level debt or level principal payments for different terms. Contact us now for your estimated debt schedules.

New Title II Regulations on Web & Mobile App Accessibility

By Elizabeth C. Trautz, Esq.

For many years, the U.S. Department of Justice has taken action to ensure that public entities covered under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) comply with accessibility standards related to both the physical and digital spaces. The ADA Standards for Accessible Design have existed since shortly after the ADA’s passage in 1990, containing explicit accessibility requirements for physical spaces associated with public buildings and facilities. However, the ADA did not reference digital space until recently (April 24, 2024), when its implementing regulations were amended to create a new subpart (subpart H) applicable to services, programs, and activities offered through the websites and mobile applications of public entities.

The new regulations require public entities to ensure that web content and mobile applications (i.e., apps) that the public entity “provides or makes available, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements” are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.1 Web content is defined as “the information and sensory experience to be communicated to the user by means of a user agent, including code or markup that defines the content’s structure, presentation, and interactions.”2 In other words, web content can be thought of as the elements that make up a public entity’s website, such as text, images, sounds, videos, controls, and animations. Mobile apps are defined as “software applications that are downloaded and designed to run on mobile devices” and include both native apps (those built in to the smartphone) and hybrid apps (those downloaded to your device).3

The DOJ has emphasized that “provides or makes available” is not intended to mean that a public entity’s obligations under this subpart only apply to web content that the public entity creates or owns.4 Rather, the accessibility requirements also apply to web content that is operated or furnished by third parties through a contractual, licensing, or other arrangement with the public entity. This might include, for example, a mobile application, run by a third-party vendor, that is used to pay for public parking; or a third-party website that a municipality contracts with to provide an updated list of available public housing. While many public entities expressed concern during the DOJ’s rulemaking process related to their ability to control third party web content, the DOJ has held firm that public entities may not avoid responsibility for the accessibility of web material or mobile apps created by their third-party vendors.

While the new regulations are fairly brief, they incorporate by reference the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 (WCAG 2.1). The WCAG 2.1 sets forth extensive standards designed to ensure that web content and mobile applications are accessible to individuals with disabilities, including anyone who uses a wide variety of software or assistive technology devices to retrieve and access web content. The WCAG 2.1, which can be found here, is organized into four foundational principles – perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust – with each principle containing detailed guidance and success criteria. Information technology (IT) specialists associated with public entities are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these guidelines promptly, as municipalities will need to “comply with both Level A and Level AA success criteria and conformance requirements as specified in the WCAG 2.1” by April 24, 2026, or April 24, 2027, depending on the size of the public entity.5

Notably, the new requirements for web and mobile app accessibility preserve certain defenses generally available under the ADA and its implementing regulations. Specifically, where a public entity can demonstrate that compliance with some aspect of the new regulations “would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens,” compliance is only required to the extent that it does not result in a fundamental alteration or undue burden.6 The regulations also contain a number of exceptions – meaning content that does not need to comply with WCAG 2.1 standards. Those exceptions largely pertain to preexisting, rarely used web material and certain content that would be particularly difficult to make accessible.

With compliance dates looming, it would be prudent for municipalities to coordinate with their administrators, web developers, and marketing teams to, among other steps, (i) develop a step-by-step plan for complying with the new accessibility rules; (ii) develop policies on website and mobile app accessibility; and (iii) identify points of contact for members of the public to report barriers to accessibility in the digital space.

This is not a legal document nor is it intended to serve as legal advice or a legal opinion. Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon, P.A. makes no representations that this is a complete or final description or procedure that would ensure legal compliance and does not intend that the reader should rely on it as such.

Becoming

Understanding Trust and Its Implications at the Local Level

By Nate Bernitz, UNH Cooperative Extension

Imagine what’s possible in a community where there is a high level of mutual trust between residents and their local government. This is an ideal that many communities strive for but often find difficult to achieve. Yet, it’s a powerful notion that underscores our bold experiment in democracy.

According to the Government Leadership Solutions’ 2023 State of Local Government Leadership Pipeline study, local government leaders believe trust is the biggest issue facing local governments today. Their research also shows that the ability to attract and retain talent, which is the second most significant challenge for local government, is directly connected to public trust in local government. This has a carry-through effect through which a quality, well-staffed workforce can provide better services and foster transparency, directly impacting public trust in local government. These relationships help illustrate why local government leaders believe trust is the biggest issue facing local governments today.

Survey research widely demonstrates that people tend to trust local institutions more than national ones, including government and media. However, trust is in measurable decline across the board. New Hampshire, despite its strong tradition of local governance and citizen participation, is not immune to this national trend (Mallory, 2024).

As that trend persists, the democratic ideals that inspire participatory governance, like the tradition of a town meeting, become less tenable. As a result, citizens can become progressively more removed from the decisions made by government that impact their communities and lives. However, there are ways to confront and potentially reverse this trend at the community level.

What is trust?

Trust has many definitions, but fundamentally, it is the belief in the abilities and integrity of a trustee. In a community context, there is relational trust and public trust.

Relational trust is the trust community members have in one another. It can be specific to individuals or general concerning people in the community.

Public trust is the trust community members have in public institutions and officials. It can be specific towards individual officials and entities (such as a single department) or general concerning the local government.

Aspects of Community Trust

1. Reliability: People can rely on each other to keep promises and follow through on commitments.

2. Transparency: People believe they will have access to the information they need, and there will be effective and consistent communication.

3. Competence: People trust in the abilities, competence, and knowledge of others to perform tasks well or ensure they are done well by others.

4. Good Intentions: People act in the community’s interest when expected to do so, demonstrating care for one another.

Adapted from Eriks Dunens (Hoelting, 2022)

Measuring Trust

While trust within any community is hard to measure, there are a few ways it can be observed and understood.

Social Media Networks

Local community Facebook groups and other social media networks such as Nextdoor often reveal, and potentially even exacerbate, dynamics of trust between people and their local government and with one another. These groups often blend posts about mundane topics like mail delivery mix-ups, positive and helpful posts about local happenings, and more controversial and heated conversations.

We may be able to glean insights into the level of trust in any given community by analyzing the composition of posts and how much engagement these different types of posts are receiving. Online social networks can be positive catalysts for building trust when they are used to effectively organize and solve problems in real time, share knowledge, cultivate connections, and complement a community’s physical spaces. At the same time, social networks can be negative catalysts when used to turn people against each one another, spread misinformation, and proliferate negativity.

Some communities are embracing digital engagement platforms such as Zencity and Go Vocal1 that host and analyze this conversation, facilitating community input into actionable ideas. Digital engagement platforms are designed as a more productive alternative to existing social networks and are managed by the local government as a tool for outreach and engagement.

Board Meetings

Local board meetings can provide valuable insights into community decision-making, but they can also be misleading. A common perception is that these meetings often attract disproportionate participation from individuals or groups with a vested interest in a specific issue or issues. This can mean that testimony and conversation at board meetings might not be representative of the full community. Even when citizens broadly rate their local government well, “much of what administrators hear may be complaints rather than praise since citizens and the media appear more likely to criticize than to compliment public service” (Melkers and Thomas, 1998). Sometimes seeing an unexpectedly large turnout

for a meeting can signal resonance, whether positive or negative, but may also merely reflect a high degree of organization from an interest group.

But perhaps more insightful is how members of a board and municipal staff respond to and engage with those attending meetings. Is engagement more proactive, focused on educating residents and encouraging their participation? Or is it more reactive, where local government officials are consumed with responding to complaints and controversies? There will always be some of the latter, but higher trust communities may see more of the former than lower trust communities. Likewise, we may be able to gain insights on civic health based on local election results, namely whether proposed budgets and warrant articles are approved or rejected.

Transparency and Access

On a related note is the degree to which local government takes steps beyond what is required to increase accessibility and boost participation. For example, does a community enable those watching a meeting remotely to testify? Is it easy or hard to find information on the town website? Are local officials friendly and welcoming to those who show up to make their voice heard, ask questions, or simply observe? Although it sounds formal, local governments can develop on-ramps to participation. This can be as simple as sharing who to talk to, how to learn more, and what opportunities there are to participate. Those already involved may take for granted how intimidating it can be to participate, given the rigidity of meeting procedures, the complexity of applicable statutes and ordinances, and the technical nature of local policy making.

PROBLEM SOLVING

our strong point.

Messaging

There may also be insights gained from looking at the attitudes of those who run for local office, and those who win those elections. Given that local government positions in New Hampshire are mostly non-partisan, the degree to which candidates and elected officials highlight their political ideologies may yield insights on a community’s civic health. This aligns with broader trends that show a nationalizing of local politics, where messaging around issues most relevant to national politics permeate down to the local level.

According to World Bank social scientist Michael Woolcock, rather than tap into best-practice solutions adopted from elsewhere to problems determined by outsiders, it’s best to focus on locally nominated and

1: Any reference to commercial products, trade names, or brand names is for information only, and no endorsement or approval is intended.

prioritized problems as the basis for crafting the best fit for local solutions (Local Solutions for Local Problems, 2013). While this argument is made in the context of international development work, it also applies neatly to the messaging and approach to governance of candidates for local office.

Volunteerism

Volunteerism is another indicator of trust. Are there a variety of local volunteer committees dedicated to addressing local issues, like recreation, master plans, sustainability, education, economic development, housing, energy, and specific local projects? Are there enough volunteers for these committees, and do volunteers actively participate? Are these groups and committees inclusive and welcoming to new members? Is there a group of citizens who publish a newsletter? Communities with high levels of trust are often enriched with an active culture of volunteerism.

Research from the Do Good Institute at University of Maryland finds that an increase in volunteerism seems to encourage people to do favors for their neighbors more often as well as join community groups and organizations (Dietz, 2024). The relationship between volunteerism, association, and trust appears to be strong, so in a community with a strong culture of volunteerism and association you may expect higher levels of trust, and vice versa.

Another Framework for Measuring Trust

The Aspen Institute, an educational and policy studies organization, hosts Weave: The Social Fabric Project, focused on addressing what they characterize as a “crisis of broken trust” in the United States. They developed

a Social Trust Index to measure trust at the local level across the country. They measure trust using three indicators: trusting behavior, trusting intentions, and trusting spaces. When you enter a zip code into their interactive map, you will see a score for each of those indicators on a scale of 0-100.

- Trusting behaviors measures people’s actions, including their membership in local institutions, volunteerism, voting, and participation in community events.

- Trusting intentions measures people’s sentiments, using surveys and social media data.

- Trusting spaces measures whether there are physical spaces to gather and connect.

Relationship Between Community Engagement and Trust

Successful community engagement leverages community input to influence and drive adoption of initiatives. The idea is simple: invite community members to participate in identifying priorities and opportunities and then implement solutions grounded in the feedback and ideas people shared. The theory, borne out in practice, is that community members are more likely to support initiatives when they have an opportunity to provide meaningful input and can see that the initiative is developed using that input. As Stephen M.R. Covey writes, “change happens at the speed of trust,” and as trust goes down costs increase too (Covey, 2006). Covey also coined the term “low trust tax” to describe that phenomenon.

When community engagement is

strong and trust levels are high, there can be a positive feedback loop in which public officials and the community work together to solve and implement solutions. Stephen Goldsmith, director of Data-Smart City Solutions at the Bloomberg Center for Cities at Harvard University writes that “trust empowers local officials to rally public support for large, aspirational goals.” Creating more opportunities to assemble influences trust between citizens and local officials, and that trust enables productive civic discourse and allows for flexibility in policy making (Maskell, 2000). An informed citizenry is also strongly correlated with higher trust in local government (Edelman Trust Barometer Index, 2021).

When community engagement is weak, but trust levels are high, public officials may have the ability to develop and implement solutions anyway. Public officials may identify time, money, resources, and potential criticism as reasons to minimize community engagement (Yang, 2005). But that carries risk, because if the community later comes to disapprove of an initiative and hadn’t been meaningfully engaged to develop and implement that initiative, trust levels may go down.

When trust levels are lower, even the most fundamental acts of governance can be strained, leaving little capacity to solve problems. If proposed annual budgets and warrant articles are routinely rejected by voters, that signals a breakdown in the feedback loop. This could mean that the community wasn’t engaged, and/or that their feedback wasn’t incorporated. In some cases, it can also signal low levels of trust.

The way in which a community is engaged can be crucial. Sometimes local officials may think they implemented strong community engage-

Advertise with us!

New Hampshire Town and City is the official magazine of the New Hampshire Municipal Association, a nonprofit organization serving cities, towns, village districts, and counties. With a circulation of 1,600, the magazine is the only publication that comprehensively reaches the entire New Hampshire municipal market. Over 1,500 physical copies are distributed across the state, with an additional 1,000 digital versions sent directly to recipients. On average, the publication garners 65,000 impressions annually. Subscribers include mayors, councilors, selectmen, city and town managers, road agents, public works directors, assessors, clerks, and finance directors.

AD SIZEWIDTH X HEIGHT (IN)PRICE

ment, but the engagement strategy may have been more focused on informing or superficially consulting their citizens rather than empowering them in the process. Especially when levels of trust are lower, “citizens often view these programs as ‘window dressing’” and refuse to participate (Yang, 2005).

Even with strong engagement, voters may still reject proposals. When budgets and warrant articles are rejected, capacity to solve problems may be redirected to simply find a way to move forward on how to fund essential local functions.

Building Trust

Rebuilding trust can take years and require going above and beyond, even as community members discount or express hostility towards those efforts and even organize to undermine them. That can be deeply frustrating.

Rebuilding trust in citizens towards their local government may require public officials to trust their citizens first. Kaifeng Yang writes that local officials “are not likely to proactively implement trust-enhancing reform policies if they do not trust citizens” and “a theory of improving citizens’ trust in government is incomplete without an explanation of administrators’ trust in citizens because trust is mutual and reciprocal” (Yang, 2005). In practice, this means that local officials are welcoming, encouraging, and respectful of citizen participation, and earnestly attempt education and outreach. This is predicated on the belief that residents have valuable personal knowledge, experience, and ideas that can contribute to effective local governance.

But by taking the time to measure

trust in a community and going deep to understand it at a more granular level, efforts to regain or build trust can be more successful. If using the Social Trust Index, a community may find that there are strengths to build on and challenges to focus on and address. It’s crucial for local officials to demonstrate they are listening and showing that they understand where people are coming from.

Five Tips for Communities to Build Trust

1. Create a Welcoming and Respectful Culture: New and previously inactive residents benefit from extra effort to onboard them into the community and guide them on how to get involved. Treat all people and opinions with respect and redirect them to the most appropriate venues for participation as necessary. View questions from the public as opportunities for education and engagement.

2. Enhance Communication and Transparency: Proactively share information in various formats and ensure community members understand how they can engage with it. This requires commitment and coordination from all departments.

3. Foster Inclusive Participation: Reach out to underrepresented and underserved populations using a “meet people where they are” approach. Consider potential barriers to participation and find ways to alleviate them.

4. Weave Connections: Build connections between local organizations, businesses, and residents. Honor and value the community’s assets, seek and cultivate partnerships, and create opportunities for people to come together.

5. Demonstrate Consistency, Reliability, and Competence: Follow through on commitments and validate public input to build trust.

UNH Cooperative Extension's Community & Economic Development team helps communities design processes to address local challenges, including building public trust. Contact the author at nate.bernitz@unh.edu or 603-678-4576 to explore how to apply these ideas in your community.

View the information brief in its entirety, including full citations and recommended resources, at https://extension.unh.edu/resource/ understanding-public-trust-local-level

WHAT WE DO

We're committed to offer the highest quality health care to our members through unique and engaging wellness intiatives and outstanding customer service.

We work to reduce the administrative burden of employee health insurance plans for public sector administrators by offering day to day support services.

WHY CHOOSE US

We understand the importance of employee benefits. When it comes to building health plans and wellness programs employees want, we are your team.

Whether you are dealing with a high cost prescription drug, seeking education about your plans, or having trouble getting care approved...we are here for you.

WHAT WE OFFER

Member Services

Benefit Account Management

Custom Wellness Initiatives

Engaging Programs

Enrollment & Billing Services

info@nhitrust.org

Changes to Planning & Zoning Laws in 2024: A Guide for Municipalities

A Joint Advisory of the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the Office of Planning and Development at the New Hampshire Department of Business and Economic Affairs

September 2024

During the 2024 session, the legislature enacted a number of pieces of legislation that affect local planning and zoning processes and regulations. This guide serves as a summary of the effect of those changes.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to SB 437

SB 437 substantially alters municipal adoption of additional local amendments or regulations to the state building code. Under prior law, municipalities could adopt additional amendments to the state building code, provided that such regulations were no less stringent than the requirements of the state building code and the state fire code.

SB 437 amends this authority by continuing to allow municipal adoption of additional amendments to the state building code, which now must not be inconsistent with or less stringent than, nor intended to replace, the requirements of the most recent edition of the state building code adopted under RSA 155-A, or the state fire code adopted under RSA 153, and must relate to one article or section of the code.1 In other words, it is not permissible under new law to adopt, at the local level, an entirely new code. It is, however, permissible to adopt amendments that are targeted to one article or section of the new code.

As under prior law, locally adopted building code amendments must continue to be submitted to the state building code review board for review and confirmation prior to adoption, no later than 90 days before final adoption in cities and no later than 10 days after the conclusion of the final public hearing in towns. SB 437 limits the board’s review to confirmation that the local amendment complies with RSA 674:51 or RSA 47:22, and a verification with the state fire marshal that there is no conflict with the fire code.

There is also a requirement contained in SB 437 for municipalities to resubmit local amendments to the state building code and codes adopted prior to July 1, 2024, and their

procedural history of adoption per RSA 155-A:10 to the state building code review board for review and confirmation that the local amendments are not less stringent than or inconsistent with the most recent edition of the state building code. HB 1059, which updates the definition of the state building code to include more recent versions of certain international codes and amendments approved by the building code review board, became law on July 1, 2024.

There is a similar requirement in SB 437 for municipalities to resubmit local amendments to the state fire code adopted prior to July 1, 2024, and the procedural history of adoption per RSA 155-A:10 to the state fire marshal for review and confirmation that the local amendments are not less restrictive than or in conflict with the most recent edition of the state fire code and are based on sound engineering practices. SB 599, which updates the definition of the state fire code to include more recent versions of certain codes and amendments approved by the state board of fire control, became law on August 13, 2024.

These definitional updates by their nature require municipalities to decide whether to readopt local amendments to the state building code and state fire code as the prior adoption now references codes which have changed by legislative action. These changes went into effect July 1, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1202

HB 1202 includes two provisions. The first provision requires that the Department of Transportation issue driveway permits within 60 days of receiving an application for any existing or proposed residential use of land, including multifamily development that is not classified as a major driveway under the department’s policy relating to driveways and access to the state highway system.

The second provision requires that the planning board or its delegate act on driveway permits issued by the Department of Transportation within 65 days of receipt of notification

Launched last year, our platform enhances visibility for businesses providing valuable products and services to New Hampshire's municipal governments. Get noticed and grow your municipal client base today!

TOWN & CITY

Recognition in our magazine, with over 65,000 annual impressions and 1,500 physical copies per issue.

WEBSITE FEATURE

Rotating features on our homepage, encouraging members to support our online advertisers.

NEWSLINK AD

A one-time business card-sized promotion in NewsLink, upon request (approx. 1,100 subscribers).

DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION

Complimentary digital subscriptions to Town and City magazine and our NewsLink e-newsletter.

that the Department of Transportation issued the driveway permit.2 These changes go into effect October 22, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1221

HB 1221 includes solid waste landfills in the definition of development of regional impact for the purpose of applications coming before the local land use board. If a solid waste landfill is proposed, any municipality which regulates solid waste landfills in its zoning ordinance, site plan review regulations, or subdivision regulations and requires application to the planning board for local approval of the landfill would be required to provide notice that such application is a development of regional impact to all municipalities located within New Hampshire that are: (a) within the watershed defined by the 8-digit Hydrologic Units from the National Hydrography Dataset 2011 where such landfill is located, and (b) if outside the watershed, located within 10 miles of the boundaries of the proposed landfill. These changes went into effect September 17, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1359

HB 1359 defines the phrase “directly across the street or stream” as used in the definition of “abutter” in RSA 672:3 for purposes of receiving testimony as well as notification. This change is intended to overturn the Supreme Court decision in Seabrook Onestop, Inc. v. Town of Seabrook, No. 2020-0251 (N.H. Sep. 16, 2021) which determined that under the then-existing definition of “abutter,” any property that is “diagonally across the street” was not an “abutter.”

The new definition includes adjacent properties as “determined by lines drawn perpendicular from all pairs of corner boundaries along the street or

stream of the applicant to pairs of projected points on any property boundary across the street or stream that intersect these perpendicular lines. This includes any property that lies along the street or stream between each pair of projected points, or is withing 50 feet of any projected point.”

Additionally, HB 1359 narrows who may appeal to the board of adjustment concerning any matter within the board’s powers pursuant to RSA 674:33 and 676:5 to the applicant, an abutter as defined by RSA 672:3, or by any officer, department, board, or bureau of the municipality affected by any decision of the administrative officer. HB 1359 also narrows who may apply for a rehearing of a zoning board of adjustment order or decision, or any decision of the local legislative body or a board of appeals in regard to its zoning, pursuant to RSA 677:2 to the selectmen, any party to the action or proceedings, or an abutter as defined by RSA 672:3. Existing law allowed “any person aggrieved” to appeal or ask for a rehearing. These changes went into effect September 1, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1361

HB 1361 is a rewrite of the existing manufactured home subdivision statute, RSA 674:32 to clarify the archaic language previously used throughout.

Additionally, HB 1361 requires that municipalities, regardless of whether they permit construction of new manufactured housing parks, allow reasonable and realistic opportunities for the expansion of manufactured housing parks that existed within their geographic boundaries as of July 1, 2024. These changes went into effect July 19, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1371

HB 1371 grants municipalities the ability to include a waste reduction section in their master plans which outlines a municipality’s solid waste reduction plan, including ways to reduce solid waste disposal, such as increasing reuse, recycling, composting, and/or hazardous and electronic waste management. Under the master plan statute, RSA 674:2, master plans must include a vision and land use section and may include other, statutorily enumerated sections.3 HB 1371 adds “waste reduction” to the list of may include sections. These changes go into effect September 24, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB

1400

HB 1400 contains the most substantive changes to land use law and combines provisions originally contained within several bills filed this session. The following changes were added:

2: Generally, after the Department of Transportation issues a state driveway permit, no further action is necessary on the part of the planning board or its delegate.

3: Although legally, master plans may only include those sections listed under RSA 674:2, there is no enforcement mechanism and it is often the case that municipal master plans include provisions in addition to those allowed by statute.

Cordell A. Johnston Attorney at Law

Representing towns and cities

P.O. Box 252

Henniker, NH 03242

603-748-4019

cordell@cajohnston.com

RSA 79-E: Community Revitalization Tax Relief Incentive

RSA 79-E was updated to allow the local legislative body of a municipality to establish tax relief for the owners of a building or structure currently being used for office use, in whole or in part, if such use is converted to residential use, in whole or in part.4 The governing body of a municipality is responsible for designating the boundaries of the office conversion zone within the municipality where this tax relief shall apply. A municipality may also establish criteria for the public benefits, goals, and measures that will determine the eligibility of qualifying structures for tax relief located within a designated office conversion zone. Office use is defined as buildings or structures used or intended for use in whole or in part for the practice of a profession, the carrying on of a business or occupation or the conduct of a non-profit organization or government entity. Office use also includes co-working spaces. These changes went into effect July 1, 2024, and are repealed January 1, 2035.

Local Option to Authorize Governing Body to Make Zoning Changes Expanded

A new provision, RSA 674:18-a, provides a local option for local governments with zoning authority vested in their legislative body (i.e. non-charter towns, village districts with independent zoning authority, and counties in which there are located unincorporated places) to vote to allow their governing bodies to adopt amendments to the local zoning ordinances and the local zoning map. Under prior law, only cities and charter towns had the authority to decide whether to grant this authority to the governing body. Local governments who seek to adopt this local option should “place the

question on the warrant of a special or annual meeting, by the governing body or by petition pursuant to RSA 39:3, or otherwise by acting upon the question of adoption [of this delegation of authority to amend the zoning ordinance and zoning map to the governing body] in accordance with its normal procedures for passage of ordinances.”

If the local legislative body votes to delegate this authority, a majority vote of the governing body during any time of the year, after at least one full public hearing pursuant to RSA 675:7, would be sufficient to amend the local zoning ordinances and map. These changes went into effect July 1, 2024.

Local Regulation of Parking Requirements

HB 1400 contains two separate provisions related to local regulation of parking requirements for residential uses. The first authorizes the local legislative body of a city, town, or county in which there are located unincorporated towns or unorganized places to regulate “accessory parking for vehicles,”5 subject to certain limitations:

• The local regulations cannot require more than 1.5 residential parking spaces per unit for studio and one-bedroom units under 1,000 square feet that meet the requirements for workforce housing under RSA 674:58 IV.

• The local regulations cannot require more than 1.5 residential parking spaces per unit for multifamily developments of 10 units or more.

The second provision requires that, if a proposed residential use proposes to meet the on-site parking requirements prescribed by a local ordinance or regulation with an “alternative parking

solution” due to economic considerations,6 the planning board shall be required to consider the “alternative parking solution.” The phrase “alternative parking solution” is defined by the statute to mean, “a proposal by an applicant to meet the parking demand created by a proposed residential use as a substitute for meeting the onsite parking requirements.” In other words, once the anticipated parking demand is determined, if the applicant can propose a solution to meeting that demand – other than by meeting the locally adopted on-site parking requirements – then the planning board must consider that alternative.

This second provision is not limited to a specific type of residential use, such as multi-family developments, nor does it require anything more than that the applicant meet the anticipated demand for the proposed residential use. For example, if an applicant proposes a large residential development and can demonstrate that the anticipated demand is lower than the locally adopted regulation, then the planning board must use the anticipated demand as the starting point for how many parking spaces will be required, not the locally adopted regulation. As such, it is possible that a multi-family development of 10 units or more could see an anticipated demand of fewer than 1.5 residential parking spaces per unit, e.g. 1.3 spaces, and that 1.3 spaces would be the start of the inquiry for how to meet the demand, not the locally adopted regulation nor the prior statutory provision of a maximum requirement of 1.5 spaces.

Importantly, this second parking provision states that, “[i]f the applicant can demonstrate that the alternative parking solution will meet the parking demand created by the proposed residential use, a planning board shall be required to approve the alternative

parking solution proposed by the applicant.” To continue the example above, if the applicant can demonstrate that the parking demand is 1.3 spaces and the proposed solution meets that demand, then the planning board must approve that solution.7

The second provision also states, “if a planning board during the review process of a subdivision plat, site plan, or other land use application for the proposed residential use doesn’t agree with the applicant’s determination that the alternative parking solution will meet the parking demand created by the proposed residential use, the planning board can request third-party review under RSA 676:4-b, I.” This provision goes on to say, “the planning board shall not be required to approve the alternative parking solution if the results of the third-party review under RSA676:4-b, I, conclude that the proposed alternative parking solution will not meet the parking demand created by the proposed residential use.” This provision also clarifies that, “planning boards shall have the authority under RSA674:16-a to approve residential uses with alternative parking solutions which may be inconsistent with the requirements of their zoning ordinance.”

While municipalities which regulate residential parking should update their

local regulations to reflect the new statutory minimums listed above, they should also be aware that applicants that challenge the assumed, anticipated demand contained within both the local regulation and the statute, will be evaluated under a different standard based on anticipated demand, not locally or statutorily prescribed minimums.

The first parking provision does not go into effect until January 1, 2025, but the second parking provision went into effect July 1, 2024.

Summary of Changes Pursuant to HB 1567

HB 1567 alters RSA 672:1, V-a, the home-based childcare statute, and adds additional language to RSA 674:16. This replaces the existing requirement8 of allowing six full-time preschool aged children and three part-time school aged children at a home-based day care with a requirement that such care is allowed as an accessory use to any primary residential use by right or by conditional use permit if all requirements for such programs adopted in rules of the department of health and human services (He-C 4002) are met. The new section in RSA 674:16, VI also states, “Family or group family childcare...

shall not be subject to local site plan review in any zone where a primary residential use is permitted.” If a municipality chooses to regulate a homebased childcare via conditional use permit it should pay careful to attention to make sure that the conditional use permit requirements don’t reference the site plan review requirements or mimic the intent of site plan review. This law doesn’t affect the authority of local health inspectors, fire inspectors, and code enforcement officers to regulate and inspect family or group family childcares to ensure compliance with health and safety requirements in the He-C 4002 rules. These changes go into effect September 24, 2024.

Time to Get Started

Please understand that this article is only an overview of the changes to these laws. Many of the issues outlined here will require careful review of existing local ordinances and regulations, and municipalities are strongly encouraged to consult with their legal counsel or professional planning staff as they consider how to comply with these new laws. NHMA’s legal staff and OPD staff also is available to answer questions about the law, although we do not have the resources to assist with reviewing and drafting ordinances or local regulations.

C ERTIFIED PUBLIC

A

CCOUNTANTS “Experience Counts”

We want to be more than just your auditors! We know New Hampshire governments Your needs come rst at Vachon Clukay & Company PC, so we’ve structured ourselves to fulfill all of your service needs. We provide the following services:

be part of your team. Contact: Jarad J. Vartanian, CPA

Associates of New England Inc

A vita r A ssociate s o f N e w Englan d In c

Cartographic Associates, Inc., dba CAI Technologies

Carto graphi c Associates , In c. , db a CA I

Technologie s

CheckmateHCM

CheckmateHC M

Community Heart & Soul

C ommunit y Hear t & Sou l

Cordell A. Johnston, Attorney at Law

Cordel l A . Johnston , Attorn e y a t La w

Cordell

Donahue, Tucker & Ciandella, PLLC

Donahue , T uck e r & Cia ndella , PLL C

Doucet Survey, LLC

D o uce t Su rvey , LL C

LLC

Drummond Woodsum

Drummon d Woodsu m

Drummond Woodsum

Eagle Network Solutions

E agl e N etw or k Sol ut ion s

Freedom Energy Logistics

Eagle Network Solutions HealthTrust

F reedo m Ene rg y Logistic s

HealthTrust, Inc.

HealthTrust , Inc .

HL Turner Group

HEB Engineers

H EB Engineers

IBEW Local 490

H.L. Turner Group Inc.

H.L . Tur ne r Grou p Inc .

IBEW Local 490

IBE W L o ca l 4 9 0

JSJ Auctions, LLC MetLife

JS J A uctions , LL C

JSJ Auctions, LLC

MetLife

Me t Lif e

Mitchell Municipal Group, P.A.

MHEC

Municipal Resources, Inc.

Mitchell Municipal Group, P.A.

Municipal Technology Systems, LLC

Municipal Resources, Inc.

Municipal Technology Systems, LLC

NH Interlocal Trust

Municipal Technology Systems, LLC

NH Interlocal Trust

NH Municipal Bond Bank

NH PDIP/PFM Asset Management LLC

NH Interlocal Trust

NH Tax Deed & Property Auctions

NH PDIP/PFM Asset Management LLC

NH Tax Deed & Property Auctions

Pare Corporation

NH Tax Deed & Property Auctions

Primex

Pare Corporation

Primex

Sertex Broadband Solutions

TD Bank

N.A.

Umbral Technologies

Sertex Broadband Solutions TD Bank

Upton & Hatfield, LLP

Umbral Technologies

Vachon Clukay & Company PC

Upton & Hatfield, LLP

Vachon Clukay & Company PC

Government Solutions, Inc.

VHB

Vachon Clukay & Company PC

VHB

Vision Government Solutions, Inc.

Vision Government Solutions Inc.

2024-2047 NHMA Strategic Plan

Our Vision: NHMA is known as the premier source of information and supp

Our Vision: NHMA is known as the premier source of information and suppo

Our Vision: NHMA is known as the premier source of information and supp

Our Mission: NHMA supports effective municipal government by leveragin training, advocacy, and legal services.

Member Services and Programs

NHMA knows its members' needs and is responsive. Our services and programs are helpful only if they are relevant to our members’ needs and provided in a timely manner. Under this priority, we’ll be looking at new ways of delivering advice and content; exploring existing and potential partnerships and initiatives to provide more content and support to our members; and finding new ways to communicate with our members about legislation and other important policy issues.

NHMA knows its members' needs and is responsive. Our services and programs are helpful only if they are relevant to our members’ needs and provided in a timely manner Under this priority, we’ll be looking at new ways of delivering advice and content; exploring existing and potential partnerships and initiatives to provide more content and support to our members; and finding new ways to communicate with our members about legislation and other important policy issues.

Member Outreach

NHMA knows its members and effectively engages with them. If members aren’t fully aware of our programs and services, they can’t take advantage of the full benefits of membership. The challenge under this goal presents the following question: How can we communicate with you better? And with our members busier than ever, effective communication becomes even more challenging We will be working to communicate with our members in new and different ways and reach our members where they are.

NHMA knows its members and effectively engages with them. If members aren’t fully aware of our programs and services, they can’t take advantage of the full benefits of membership The challenge under this goal presents the following question: How can we communicate with you better? And with our members busier than ever, effective communication becomes even more challenging. We will be working to communicate with our members in new and different ways and reach our members where they are

NHMA knows its members and effectively engages with them. If members aren’t fully aware of our programs and services, they can’t take advantage of the full benefits of membership. The challenge under this goal presents the following question: How can we communicate with you better? And with our members busier than ever, effective communication becomes even more challenging. We will be working to communicate with our members in new and different ways and reach our members where they are.

Strat

Prior

Strat Prior

Strate Priori

The

overall

objective of 2024-2027 Strategic Plan is to enhance NHMA's impact and sustainability to serve

The overall objective of 2024-2027 Strategic Plan is to enhance NHMA's impact and sustainability to serve our members to effectively conduct the work of their municipalities, through five strategic priorities:

the work of their

municipalities, through five strategic priorities:

The overall objective of 2024-2027 Strategic Plan is to enhance NHMA's impact and sustainability to serve our members to effectively conduct the work of their municipalities, through five strategic priorities:

our members to effectively conduct

port needed for town and city officials to effectively serve the public.

ng the collaborative strengths of NH cities and towns through education,

Staffing

Providing expertise to our members while considering overall staff capacity. Our staff consists of nine incredibly knowledgeable and dedicated individuals who serve thousands of local officials across the state and follow hundreds of bills each year This priority is about keeping our staff lean, efficient, and nimble but also ensuring we have sufficient staff and expertise to meet our members’ needs.

Providing expertise to our members while considering overall staff capacity. Our staff consists of nine incredibly knowledgeable and dedicated individuals who serve thousands of local officials across the state and follow hundreds of bills each year. This priority is about keeping our staff lean, efficient, and nimble but also ensuring we have sufficient staff and expertise to meet our members’ needs

Providing expertise to our members while considering overall staff capacity. Our staff consists of nine incredibly knowledgeable and dedicated individuals who serve thousands of local officials across the state and follow hundreds of bills each year. This priority is about keeping our staff lean, efficient, and nimble but also ensuring we have sufficient staff and expertise to meet our members’ needs.

Revenue Generation

Find new sources of revenue to better serve NHMA members.

NHMA has been fortunate to receive support from many companies and organizations through sponsorship and exhibitor opportunities for many years This support helps offset member dues, which are our primary source of revenue. Under this priority, we will be looking at new and creative ways to support NHMA and its membership through non-dues revenue.

Find new sources of revenue to better serve NHMA members. NHMA has been fortunate to receive support from many companies and organizations through sponsorship and exhibitor opportunities for many years. This support helps offset member dues, which are our primary source of revenue Under this priority, we will be looking at new and creative ways to support NHMA and its membership through non-dues revenue.

NHMA has been fortunate to receive support from many companies and organizations through sponsorship and exhibitor opportunities for many years. This support helps offset member dues, which are our primary source of revenue. Under this priority, we will be looking at new and creative ways to support NHMA and its membership through non-dues revenue

Innovation

NHMA is nimble, adaptive, and responds to change.

“The only constant in life is change ” While some things in municipal government seem to stay the same, when it comes to serving the public, new issues, needs, and conundrums are never in short supply. And while we saw change and adaptation at its extreme during the COVID-19 pandemic, change is happening in much less extreme ways all the time. Because NHMA’s purpose is to serve its members, this priority is about ensuring that NHMA has its finger on the pulse and that our services and resources are adapting with the changing world and our members’ needs.

“The only constant in life is change.” While some things in municipal government seem to stay the same, when it comes to serving the public, new issues, needs, and conundrums are never in short supply And while we saw change and adaptation at its extreme during the COVID-19 pandemic, change is happening in much less extreme ways all the time. Because NHMA’s purpose is to serve its members, this priority is about ensuring that NHMA has its finger on the pulse and that our services and resources are adapting with the changing world and our members’ needs

Because NHMA’s purpose is to serve its members, this priority is about ensuring that NHMA has its finger on the pulse and that our services and resources are adapting with the changing world and our members’ needs.

83rd Annual Conference and Exhibition

Land Use Regulation Immunity and Governmental Land Uses

By Stephen C. Buckley, NHMA Legal Services Counsel

Whether or not a governmental user of land is exempt from complying with local land use regulations requires applying the language of RSA 674:54, Governmental Land Uses. However, to completely understand whether a governmental use of land is exempt from local land use regulations requires more than reading and applying that statute. RSA 674:54 only creates a procedure whereby a governmental user of land must participate in a process of receiving non-binding comments on a proposed use of land for governmental purposes. The underlying immunity from local zoning and planning regulations enjoyed by governmental entities derives from decisions of the NH Supreme Court.

Supreme Court rules in 1973 certain governmental uses exempt from zoning regulations

In two decisions issued by the NH Supreme Court in 1973 the Court declared that a county and a city are not bound by local zoning rules. In Opinion of the Justices, 113 N.H. 217 (1973) the Court issued an advisory opinion to the house of representatives that New Hampshire adopts the majority rule that a county is not required to comply with a city zoning ordinance in the erection and construction of a courthouse. Then in McGrath v. Manchester, 113 N.H. 355 (1973), the Court applied that rule by holding that the City of Manchester was not bound by its own zoning ordinance in the construction of a parks and recreation garage for the repair and maintenance of vehicles. In both instances the Court explained that a governmental entity is not required to comply with a local zoning regulation for a land use project that is an essential function of government. The Court also noted that the extent to which any governmental unit shall be immune from zoning requirements is a matter within legislative control; but the New Hampshire enabling act was silent upon the subject.

Legislature enacts RSA 674:54 codifying how governmental uses are reviewed

This silence on governmental zoning immunity in our zoning enabling act changed in 1996. RSA 674:54 was enacted that year, Senate Bill 11, 1996 NH Laws Chapter 262. In testimony to the N.H. Senate Public Affairs Committee on January 19, 1995, NHMA Legal Counsel Bernie Waugh explained that the “bill’s purpose is to clarify the extent to which governmental uses of land must comply with the same requirements private landowners must comply with.” As he explained, while the N.H. Supreme Court had declared in McGrath v. Manchester, 113 N.H. 355 (1973) that local governments were exempt from zoning regulations, left unresolved was whether governmental uses of land must comply with subdivision and site plan review. The bill as proposed would have required governmental land uses to comply with local subdivision and site plan review requirements. Relative to the Application of Local Land Use Regulations to Governmental Units. SB 11, 1995 & 1996 Sessions (N.H. 1996), https://gencourt.state.nh.us/BillHistory/SofS_Archives/1996/senate/SB11S.pdfhttp://www.gen.court. state.nh.us/bill_Status (Jan.19, 2015 hearing, Remarks of Bernard Waugh, Testimony, 34)

However, the bill as adopted that became law as RSA 674:54 did not address whether governmental uses would have to comply with subdivision and site plan review requirements. The only reference to this issue in the statute is in paragraph II where it is stated that “[t]he governing body or planning board may issue nonbinding written comments relative to conformity or nonconformity of the proposal with normally applicable land use regulations to the sponsor of the governmental use within 30 days after the hearing.” This language suggests that not only is a governmental user of land exempt from zoning

regulations but also exempt from compliance with subdivision and site plan regulations. The original version of RSA 674:54 as introduced in 1995 was written to require governmental users of land comply with subdivision and site plan review, and this provision was not adopted; nevertheless it would be reasonable for local land use administrators to presume all local land use regulations do not apply to governmental land uses, including site plan review and maybe subdivision approval.

But what about subdivisions of land used for governmental purpose?

The only statutory question that remains is whether RSA 674:54 was meant to override the requirements of RSA 676:16, and RSA 676:18, that impose penalties for subdivisions not approved by the planning board. Given that subdivisions of land should be accurately recorded in a municipality’s tax records, and recognizing that some subdivision regulations could interfere with essential governmental functions, waving strict compliance with all subdivision requirements to facilitate the approval of a plat or plan that sufficiently memorializes the division of land would be appropriate.

Procedural Requirements of RSA

674:54

RSA 674:54, II does require a governmental user of land to participate in a hearing process before the select board or the planning board when undertaking a new use or a use that is a substantial change of an existing use. The identified governmental users are listed as “the state, university system, community college system of New Hampshire, county, town, city, school district, or village district.” The statute requires the following:

• The proposed governmental use shall give written notification to the select board and the planning board about the proposed governmental use of property where the undertaking is a substantial change in use or a substantial new use.

• Written notification shall contain plans, specifications, explanations of proposed changes available at the time, a statement of the governmental nature of the use and a proposed construction schedule.

• Such notification shall be provided at least 60 days prior to the beginning of construction.

• Either the select board or planning board may conduct a public hearing relative to the proposed governmental use.

• Any such hearing shall be held within 30 days after receipt of notice by the select board or planning board.

• A representative of the governmental use which provided notice shall be available to present the plans, specifications, and construction schedule, and to provide explanations.

• The select board or planning board may issue nonbinding written comments relative to conformity or nonconformity of the proposal with normally applicable land use regulations to the sponsor of the governmental use within 30 days after the hearing.

Non-Governmental Uses

of Government Land and municipal Solid Waste Facilities in another municipality fully subject to land use regulations

RSA 674:54 contains the following exemption limitations:

• Any use, construction, or development of land occurring on governmentally owned or occupied land, but which is not in furtherance of a public purpose which is statutorily or traditionally a governmental in nature shall be fully subject to local land use regulations.

• The construction and operation of any solid waste disposal facility on land owned or occupied by any city or town within another city or town shall be subject to local land use regulations to the same extent as if the land were owned and occupied by a private entity, unless the solid waste facility is on land owned by a solid waste management district formed under RSA 53-A or RSA 53-B or any combination of municipalities authorized by an act of the general court, if the land is located within a city or town that is part of the district.

Stephen Buckley is Legal Services Counsel with the New Hampshire Municipal Association. He may be contacted at 603-224-7447 or at legalinquiries@ nhmunicipal.org

Fall 2024 Legislative Update

By Natch Greyes, NHMA Government Affairs Counsel

It has been a busy fall for our government affairs team. NHMA’s now three-year relationship with BEA on providing guidance on land use law changes is an extraordinarily hot topic this year. In total, the joint NHMABEA team will be presenting on the topic at least five times (and, of course, we have our guidance document). NHMA also put together a thorough guidance document on the changes to the Right-to-Know Law and have fielded a number of questions about those changes. It is an election year, so legislators (and members) are busy contacting staff to discuss ideas for legislation. (Please keep doing so.) And, of course, we just completed our 2025-2026 legislative policy process.

At this point, we have no idea what the legislative makeup will be for the 2025-2026 legislative session. What we do know is that with a new governor, new Senate president, and the very real possibility of the House’s composition shifting one way or another, we are probably in for a very different set of circumstances than we faced over the past few years. Regardless of how it turns out, we already know that there won’t be much in the way of excess state revenue and, consequently, any one-time allocations to cities and towns will be correspondingly smaller.

In talking with legislators, it is clear that the number one issue that they’re hearing about from constituents is “housing.” With 170 public legislative service requests filed, we’re already following 52, with 11 being about planning, zoning, or land use. And we are aware of conversations on at least a dozen more “housing” topics. Frankly, it would not surprise us to see several dozen more “housing” related bills filed for the 2025 session by the time the total bill list comes out in January.

We already know that some ideas are being given priority by legislators. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are returning as a focus of, at least two, bills. Turning government-owned property into housing is another popular idea. With that in mind, please take a moment to read Stephen Buckley’s article in this edition on government owned property. And, of course, please take a moment

to read the joint BEA-NHMA guidance on land use law changes this year. (It may give you something to talk about with your local legislators.)

Speaking of legislators, we are obligated to remind you that it is an election year. That means that it’s a great opportunity to meet your new legislators and refresh your relationships with your returning legislators. If your municipality does not already have one, this is also a great time for the local governing body to begin building a formal relationship with your local legislators. We have heard from a number of members who have their local governing body regularly request local legislators attend their meetings and provide legislative updates on subjects of municipal interest. (And we regularly hear from a few legislators who are very interested to know what their local select boards may ask them.)

As the wheels of conversation are greased, new ideas about how to help cities and towns may come into existence. If they do, and your legislators are interested, please remember to reach out. NHMA is a legislative resource as well as a legal advisory one. We are happy to chat with members and legislators about ideas for legislation, research prior attempts (if any), and help identify other stakeholders. Plus, we love the opportunity to help our members with solving problems.

We look forward to working with you over the coming legislative session and please expect to hear more from our government affairs team in early January. The legislature starts a bit later this year, and so our advocacy communications will as well. Nevertheless, as new legislative service requests are published, we will continue to update our bill tracker, so if you want an early preview, please do visit our bill tracker (https://www.nhmunicipal.org/nhmabill-tracker-fastdemocracy) and consider subscribing to email updates by heading to the portal now! Log into your member portal. Click "Edit This Profile." Click "Newsletter Management." Then choose which newsletters you would like to receive.

In today’s job market, workplace ﬂexibility is more important than ever NH Paid Family and Medical Leave is a beneﬁt opportunity that helps employers stay competitive by boosting worker recruitment and retention. It gives workers paid leave to care for a newborn, themselves or a loved one.

NH Paid Family and Medical Leave is available to all private and public NH employers

Enroll your workers now! Go to paidleave.nh.gov

UNLOCK YOUR NEW NHMA MEMBER EXPERIENCE

NHMA has launched a new member portal! We invite you to log in, create your password, and explore your member profile.

IMPORTANT: You will need to use this portal to access member pricing for NHMA events.

MUNICIPAL LAND USE LAW CONFERENCE 2024

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2024 - 9:00 AM TO 3:15 PM

Join us for the upcoming Municipal Land Use Conference, designed for municipal leaders, planning boards, zoning boards, and legal professionals in New Hampshire. The event will feature keynote speaker, The Honorable Michael A. Klass from the NH Superior Court, Land Use Docket Judge, and offer a full day of interactive sessions covering vital land use topics such as zoning laws, board meeting management, and housing-friendly community initiatives. This is a must-attend event for anyone looking to gain valuable knowledge and insights to support their municipality.

Zoning 101 – Laura Spector Morgan, Esq., Joe Driscoll, Esq.

Meeting Mechanics for Land Use Boards – C. Christine Johnston, Esq., Matthew Serge, Esq.

ZBA in New Hampshire – Chris Boldt, Esq.

Planning Board Housekeeping – Stephanie Verdile, Housing Appeals Board

ZBA Decision-Making Process – Cordell A Johnston, Esq

How Can Your Community Become More Housing-Friendly? – Noah Hodgetts, Office of Planning & Development, Alvina Snegach, Office of Planning & Development

The HR REPORT

Legal Update: New Hampshire Supreme Court Weighs In on the Attorney General’s Exculpatory Evidence Schedule

By Nicholas J. Blei, Esq.

Law enforcement agencies in New Hampshire have long grappled with their role and obligations in reporting police officer misconduct to the New Hampshire Department of Justice (DOJ) for purposes of the Attorney General’s Exculpatory Evidence Schedule (“EES”). A recent decision by the New Hampshire Supreme Court in Doe v. N.H. Attorney Gen., 2024 N.H. 50 (2024) adds another level of uncertainty by adding additional criteria that the Attorney General must consider before placing an officer’s name on the EES. While the decision does not directly place additional obligations on law enforcement agencies, it may be interpreted to limit instances where agencies report officer discipline for potential inclusion on EES. Likewise, the Attorney General’s potential deference to law enforcement agencies to determine whether officers should be added to the EES may place an additional burden on agencies to conduct the legal analysis prescribed by the Court in Doe.

In 2017, the DOJ created the statewide EES as a mechanism for gathering the names of police officers who had engaged in conduct that the State was constitutionally required to disclose to criminal defendants. In 2021, RSA 105 was amended to add RSA 105:13-d, addressing an officer’s placement on the EES and a process to appeal placement. RSA 105:13-d, I states that:

The Department of Justice may voluntarily maintain an Exculpatory Evidence Schedule. The Exculpatory Evidence Schedule shall consist of a list of all current or former law enforcement officers whose personnel information contain potentially exculpatory evidence. Subject to the provisions of this section, the Exculpatory Evidence Schedule may be maintained by the Department of Justice and shall be a public record subject to RSA 91-A.

Officers added to the EES prior to the effective date of RSA 105:13-d were given a mechanism to challenge their

placement on the EES by filing a lawsuit in Superior Court while officers added to the EES after the effective date of the law must resort to the grievance procedure provided by their department.

In Doe v. N.H. Attorney Gen., three former State troopers utilized the statute to challenge their placement on EES decades earlier. The troopers were placed on the EES after an internal investigation concluded that they inflated their reported traffic enforcement activities. The troopers admitted that they had inflated their activity reports and were disciplined. They were also referred for placement on the EES (at that time referred to as the “Laurie List”).

In their lawsuit challenging EES placement, the officers argued that the internal investigation and findings that resulted in their placement on the EES were “incorrect, misinterpreted, stale, and/or not serious enough to warrant their names’ inclusion.” In response, the Attorney General argued that the officers’ untruthfulness constitutes exculpatory evidence.

RSA 105 does not define “potentially exculpatory” evidence for EES purposes. The Court noted that in the absence of a definition, the Attorney General has made that determination on their own with guidance from analogous federal law. In the absence of a statutory definition, the Court provided its own, holding that “potentially exculpatory evidence is evidence, including impeachment evidence, that is reasonably capable of being material to guilt or to punishment.”

The Court then added criteria not previously considered in determining whether an officer’s conduct is potentially exculpatory, holding that “factors such as the nature and age of the conduct are relevant for the purpose of determining whether information in a personnel file pertaining to an officer is exculpatory.” The Court also held

that potentially exculpatory evidence must be admissible in a theoretical criminal trial where the officers might be called to testify. The Court remanded the case to the Superior Court to make legal determinations regarding the potential admissibility of exculpatory evidence as a threshold test for the troopers on the EES.

Prior to this decision, the DOJ was only required to consider the underlying misconduct and determine if it was potentially exculpatory. As a result of the Doe decision, DOJ must now conduct a further analysis to determine the admissibility of that evi

Drummond Woodsum’s attorneys are experienced at guiding towns, cities, counties and local governments through a variety of issues including:

• Municipal bonds and public finance

• Land use planning, zoning and enforcement

• Ordinance drafting

• Tax abatement

• General municipal matters

• Municipal employment and labor matters

• Litigation and appeals

precisely when they need it.

agencies are not equipped to make these determinations because they call for detailed and theoretical legal analysis historically conducted by the Attorney General’s office and individual prosecutors on a case-bycase basis. If the Attorney General’s office does defer to law enforcement agencies to make these determina tions police chiefs may face pressure to make complex legal conclusions in addition to findings of fact prior to making EES referrals. hebengineers.com

 Decades of experience conducting real estate and property auctions for New Hampshire municipalities

 Comprehensive auction marketing, including custombuilt auction webpage, online and newspaper ads, property signage, and notifications to abutters and our proprietary bidder list

 Preparation of bidder materials for download and distribution

 Auction held within the municipality by experienced and knowledgeable auction professionals

 Dedicated help line for answering bidder inquiries before and after the auction

 Included skilled legal support for analyzing pre-auction legal issues, conducting real estate closings, preparing deeds, locating former owners and lienholders, and distributing excess proceeds

Congress Passes Bipartisan 12-Week Funding Extension Ensuring No Government Shutdown Through December 20th

By Michael Wallace, National League of Cities Legislative Director for Community and Economic Development

Congress ended the immediate risk of another federal shutdown by approving a continuing resolution before the new federal fiscal year begins on October 1. The continuing resolution extends FY2024 funding for 12 additional weeks until December 20th.

Clarence Anthony, CEO and Executive Director of the National League of Cities stated, “The National League of Cities thanks both the Senate and House for passing the CR (Continuing Resolution) to avoid a federal government shutdown. This bipartisan measure ensures sustained funding for essential programs that support local governments and the communities they serve. NLC looks forward to ongoing collaboration with our federal partners as Congress works to secure a long-term solution to address the needs of cities, towns and villages throughout the nation.”

House and Senate leaders will use the time until December 20th to continue negotiations over federal spending levels for FY2025, much of which will hinge on the outcome of the Presidential election in November. Although House and Senate leaders were unified in their opposition to another federal government shutdown, significant differences between the parties, and between the House and Senate, over spending priorities have derailed consideration of the annual appropriations bills under regular order.

In the run-up to the new fiscal year, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) introduced a Continuing Resolution (CR) to extend the deadline and put off the possibility of another government shutdown by six months. The Speaker’s proposal, however, also included the SAVE Act, a Voter I.D.

measure championed by many House Republicans that many Democrats object to as unwarranted. The proposal ultimately failed to garner sufficient support to pass.

As the final act of Congress before the election, House and Senate came to agreement on a “Clean CR,” that garnered the support of many in both parties. The clean CR means no new policies and very little in the way of additional funding was added to the final bill. Individual Members of Congress are likely to continue advocating for specific funding increases for emergency needs ranging from hunger relief to disaster recovery when consideration of FY25 appropriations resumes after the election. NLC supported additional funding for disaster assistance and recovery programs at FEMA and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to help cities recover from current and future presidentially declared disasters. That funding was ultimately not included.

NLC’s overall FY25 funding priorities for cities and towns were delivered to Congress by letter earlier in the appropriations cycle. NLC also delivered a letter urging a bipartisan solution to prevent a government shutdown this week.

NLC has developed a robust set of resources for cities on the impact of federal shutdowns on cities and towns, and how to address them. A short-term government shutdown with a clear resolution may not significantly impact local government operations and services, but prolonged uncertainty and limited access to federal agencies often create compounding problems impacting local governments, small businesses and residents who rely on federal aid or other support.

We are Bond Counsel for Local Government

Drummond Woodsum’s public finance team provides guidance to municipalities, counties, and schools on a wide range of financing matters, including local authorization and issuance of general obligation bonds, lease purchase agreements, tax anticipation notes, and refunding bonds.

Attorneys Steven Whitley, Greg Im, and Bill Stockmeyer are:

• Approved as local bond counsel by the NH Municipal Bond Bank;

• Listed in The Bond Buyer’s Municipal Marketplace (the “Red Book”) of NH municipal bond attorneys;

• Recognized by financial institutions locally and nationally; and

• Members of the National Association of Bond Lawyers.

Learn about the advantages of coordinating bond counsel services with other legal services offered by our Municipal Practice Group and School Law Practice Group at:

dwmlaw.com | 800.727.1941

Housing Navigator Success Stories

By Courtney Grugnale & Renée Theall

The Community Housing Navigator Grant Program, a part of the InvestNH Planning & Zoning Grant Program, was funded through the American Rescue Plan Act funding. Up to six grants were available to hire Community Housing Navigators for a period of up to two years, to be completed by September 30, 2024.

The Housing Navigator positions were created to add capacity for municipalities to address housing shortages, challenges, conversations, and opportunities. To achieve this goal, Housing Navigators actively engaged with community members, fostering partnerships, and building support networks. They provided technical assistance, conducted research, and utilized tools from the Housing Academy to enhance implementation of housing solutions.

It was especially important for Housing Navigators to provide community engagement and education skills, and to build consensus around specific housing policies or planning projects. For the program to be a success, Navigators worked with residents to build a driving force towards housing initiatives and some communities even created a designated committee to work on current and upcoming housing needs.

Two of the Housing Navigators, Courtney Grugnale and Renée Theall, combined have worked with five New Hampshire towns. The towns of Farmington and New Durham partnered to pursue a Housing Navigator grant, with support from Strafford Regional Planning Commission, because both towns were being impacted by similar housing pressures and challenges. In the Upper Valley region, the three towns of Newbury, New London, and Wilmot expressed interest in participating with the Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission’s (UVLSRPC) Housing Navigator.

Farmington

The town of Farmington has noticed a growing need for additional housing and has taken steps to fill that need. They have strong leadership in the town with a hands-on Planning board, dedicated town staff, and Town Planner Kyle Pimental. Farmington is located close to cities like Dover, Somersworth, and Rochester. In contrast to these cities, Farmington provides slightly more affordable homes. In recent years, Farmington has seen an increase in younger individuals moving to town. Affordability and proximity to major areas makes Farmington a desirable location for homes.

In response to the growing population and increasing housing demands, the planning board, in collaboration with Town Planner and Housing Navigator Courtney Grugnale, have taken steps to address barriers to housing.

In the last year, the Planning board brought forward changes to the Zoning Ordinance that would increase the density allowed in several districts with the overall goal of increasing the supply of housing. These were voted on last March and passed. To make the proposed zoning amendments easier to understand, Courtney created a flyer to be given out that explained the proposed change, and why it was being brought forward. This was done in a way that used person centered language, was visually appealing, and had visual breakdowns for density.

In addition, Courtney, along with the project team applied for a Housing Opportunity Planning Grant to allow for a corri-

dor analysis of Route 11 in Farmington. They were awarded the grant, which allowed for: an audit of zoning regulations, community engagement opportunities, reconvening a Tax Increment Financing committee, and for two new mixed-use districts along Route 11 to be considered. The mixed-use districts would allow for more housing opportunities without taking away from potential commercial along the corridor. These new districts will be voted on during the March 2025 voting session.

With new zoning regulations in place, and proposed amendments coming, Farmington is in a great spot for planning for the future of housing and working towards the needs of the community.

New Durham

Over the last two years, the town of New Durham has made progress towards housing and outlining the vision of the community. They have held three community engagement forums: one was a collaboration with the Planning board and Housing Navigator; another was an SRPC and Development Committee event; and the last, and most recent, was a collaboration between the Development Committee and Housing Navigator. With support from the Planning board, Selectboard, SRPC staff, and town staff, Courtney applied for and received a Housing Opportunity Planning grant (HOP) for the town to use towards master plan revisions in the housing and land use chapters. The advantage of having a Navigator and HOP project grant allowed for the collaboration on community engagement. In addition to partnering on a forum, they worked together to distribute a survey with over 400 responses.

Throughout the last two years, Courtney has helped to plan and organize three forums which consisted of providing attendees with data, group discussions, station activities and presentations. These provided a great space for residents to gather to discuss the vision of the town and allowed for recruitment

to the Development Committee. A subcommittee of the Planning board that would take what they’re hearing from the community and use that to move forward with commercial and residential development.

The Planning board has been able to leverage having a Housing Navigator to provide committee support on housing topics. To publicize for the forums, Courtney worked with the committee and town staff to post on the town’s website, social media, sent out mailouts, posted on bulletin boards, at local restaurants, the gas station, the library, and committee members handed out flyers at the transfer station. Yet, the most powerful form of publicity was word of mouth.

Using a hands-on approach to community engagement Courtney and the Development Committee were able to identify three key housing needs in the community: accessible 55+ housing, starter homes for young families, and housing for municipal workers and

volunteers. The town has expressed a strong interest in Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and smaller home developments, which the Development Committee is actively pursuing. As the Housing Navigator has come to an end the committee will continue the work needed to reach their housing goals.

New London

Nestled in the Dartmouth-Lake Sunapee region, the quaint town of New London is conveniently located along I-89, roughly midway between the larger hubs of Concord and Lebanon/Hanover. The town itself boasts a medium employment hub that includes: Colby-Sawyer College, New London Hospital, Hannaford, and several restaurants, smaller-scale storefronts & local businesses through the center of town.

The New London Housing Commission (NLHC) was created in late 2020. In 2022, the Housing Commission was tasked with drafting a zoning amendment to their Workforce Housing ordi-

nance for the Planning board. It went to ballot spring of 2023 and passed. The Housing Commission did a vast amount of preparation to draft the amendment and get it across the finish line. Renée Theall, UVLSRPC Housing Navigator, came on board right as this was wrapping up and heading to ballot. After it passed, the Housing Commission celebrated and then went right to work and asked “what’s next?” The statewide conversation around Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) was plentiful, the Commission members leaned into that and rolled up their sleeves to propose an amendment to the Planning board. Throughout the past year, Renée was able to research and review other town ordinances and bring that information to them. Highlighting the regulatory options in neighboring towns can foster cohesion in zoning, while allowing ability for minor adjustments to address the community's unique needs. Not all zoning amendments achieve success, and that is part of the journey. While the ADU amendment did not pass, it did identify key areas for future consideration by the town.

New London also had a strong response rate in the recent Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) surveys completed by UVLSRPC. At the request of the Housing Commission, Renée was able to dive into that data and provided two presentations. The first one was on the resident responses and the second was on the employer responses. The presentations were given at the monthly Housing Commission meetings and at the end had great questions/comments from both commission members and the public. This focused data and presentation provided valuable insights to the Housing Commission, keeping them apprised of the most recent information available.

The Housing Commission and Planning board remain committed in actively participating in housing conversations. The town applied for and received, a Housing Opportunity Planning (HOP)

Grant. They kicked that off this past Summer and have some exciting community outreach events coming up.

Newbury

Just south of New London is picturesque Newbury. A town full of recreational amenities for every season of the year. From Mt. Sunapee in the winter, to being on the water or hiking in the summer, there is always something to do.

Working with the UVLSRPC Housing Navigator, Renée and the Planning board had many conversations around housing needs for their town. Renée was also able to attend conferences across the state, along with the Housing Academy trainings, and bring back relevant information for the board. Throughout these conversations, some challenging limitations rose to the top. Most stemmed around land constraints such as steep slopes and wetlands, but the board also discussed the regulatory building size minimum as being a potential constraint. The board decided to amend the zoning ordinance, and it went on the ballot spring 2024 and passed.

A challenge for Newbury, and many other towns, is the lack of town water and sewer infrastructure. Water and sewer are not often seen as exciting or

engaging to talk about. However, the lack of this resource is a common topic for many towns when discussing residential growth. Employers are becoming increasingly involved in housing discussions and trying to find creative housing options, often with shared water and sewer systems. In Newbury, one employer recently presented a concept for clustered homes to the planning board. Through research, Renée was able to provide valuable insights regarding employer/housing solutions that are emerging both statewide and nationally.

While building relationships with board members and community members, Renée was able to help push the needle forward on housing conversations and raise awareness about diverse housing options. For example, at the Newbury Old Home Day event, the outreach facilitated engaging conversations with community members eager to explore measures that could advance home creation. This also included the topic of creative solutions to help those wishing to age in place and continue to live in the community where they have put their roots for so many years. While there is no perfect recipe, it starts with these conversations to better understand and a willingness to explore potential solutions. Newbury is in a great position to continue these discussions.

The town of Wilmot is adjacent to both New London and Newbury and concludes the Housing Navigator communities. Wilmot is a quiet town that sits between the employment hubs of Lebanon and Concord and is a neighbor of the slightly smaller employment hub of New London. Limited housing stock and lack of varying home types are a challenge for Wilmot. A strong need for starter/age in place homes were identified early on.

While Wilmot may be small, it is mighty. The town had the Housing Navigator and HOP grant running simultaneously during the first year (2023). The combined efforts led to a strong outreach – approximately 350 residents were engaged! In a community such as Wilmot, it can be challenging to “find”the people in town, given that businesses/meeting places are sparce. Renée was determined and creatively implemented outreach strategies from the Housing Academy. In strategizing where to reach voices that may otherwise not be at a town meeting, “Transfer Station & Tea” was formed. The outreach took place over two and a half days and garnered meaningful conversations and valuable information for the Planning board.

Another outreach event that was a great success was that of the Halloween Walk-

ing Tour. This event was put on by the HOP grant but included prep outreach and setup assistance from Renée. She was able to be in town leading up to the event and went door to door to let folks know in the village what was going to be happening that upcoming weekend. The collaboration that was leveraged for this engagement proved to be a large part of the success for the event.

Throughout the outreach events, the Planning board was proactive in listening to what they were hearing from residents. In the spring of 2023 they had written, proposed, and passed mixeduse for the village and commercial zones. Then, they proposed a zoning ordinance amendment to allow two ADUs by-right. This came about largely from a conceptual that was presented to the board, along with positive resident feedback to gentle density via ADUs. The ADU amendment went to ballot and passed in the spring of 2024. Through outreach efforts via sticky dot boards, surveys, and conversations, the planning board also heard that village growth and open/green space was of importance to residents. While wanting to tackle some density allowances and preserve open/ green space, the Conservation Subdivision was proposed. Due to the lengthy and thoroughness desired, the planning board created a subcommittee to explore and draft a proposed amendment. This subcommittee is still in process of draft-

ing and they, along with the planning board, hope to have something on the ballot for the Spring 2025 vote.

Summary

The additional capacity provided by Housing Navigators enhanced community planning and engagement efforts, offering vital support to hard working town staff and volunteer boards with tasks that can often feel overwhelming. An added benefit of having the Housing Navigator within the Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) allowed other Planners to assist when a task or request came up, such as more technical assistance or mapping services. A goal, and success, of the Housing Navigators was to help all residents feel a sense of ownership within their communities. Every town has its own unique characteristics, which influence how conversations, proposed amendments, and community engagement unfold. The Housing Navigators role in understanding these local dynamics was crucial for fostering meaningful dialogue and effective change. The relationships developed over the past two years have fostered involvement among community members who may not have otherwise participated in these meaningful conversations. This cumulative work has been a success to propel housing discussions forward.

Wilmot

Legal Q and A

Electioneering Guidance

By Jonathan Cowal, NHMA Municipal Services Counsel

With election season already underway, there is always renewed interest in the state’s electioneering laws. Electioneering means visibly displaying or audibly disseminating information that a reasonable person would believe explicitly advocates for or against any candidate, political party, or measure being voted. Electioneering may happen at your local elections, or throughout the year leading up to an election. There are specific rules that apply to the general public appearing to vote, elected or appointed officials, and town employees. In this article I will lay out a guidance to address the most common electioneering concerns.

Electioneering by the general public

Q. What type of conduct could be considered electioneering?

A. Wearing clothing or paraphernalia that displays a candidate's name, likeness, or logo, a ballot measure's number, title, subject, or logo, a political party's name or logo, or any communication that a reasonable person would believe explicitly advocates for or against any candidate, political party, or measure. Also, distributing or posting a card, handbill, poster, placard, picture, pin, sticker, circular, or any other form of communication that a reasonable person would believe explicitly advocates for or against any candidate, political party, or measure.

Engaging in this type of conduct could be viewed as electioneering. It is important to remember that this conduct is not prohibited, it is just subject to certain limitations at the polling places. The public is allowed to engage in electioneering leading up to an election, at an election, or after an election as long as they abide by the restrictions put in place during the actual election.

Q. What are the rules concerning electioneering at the polling place for the general public?

A. This is covered in RSA 659:43. The statute states that electioneering shall be prohibited within the polling place building. The moderator establishes one or more no-election-

eering corridors, no less than 10 feet wide, that extend from all entrances of the polling place. A voter must be allowed to enter the polling place building without interference from individuals outside the corridor. The Moderator shall designate a preferred area for electioneering where electioneering is allowed. The distribution or posting of electioneering communications, including but not limited to posters, cards, handbills, placards, pictures, pins, stickers, circulars, or articles of clothing, is prohibited within any no-electioneering corridor established outside the polling place by the moderator. As for outside of the polling place, electioneering signs shall not be affixed to the polling place building or grounds. Electioneering signs shall also not be left unattended, including those affixed to vehicles. A police officer can remove a vehicle that is parked or has been left unattended on election day for longer than 3 hours in an area designated for voters who are temporarily present for the purpose of voting. RSA 262:32, VIII

Q. What should I do if someone refuses to comply with our electioneering restrictions?

A. When it comes to wearing clothing, pins, hats, etc. that advocate for a specific candidate or measure, provided that the person is eligible to vote or register to vote in the voting district, if they are unable to remove or cover clothing that explicitly advocates for or against any candidate, political party, or measure, they may wear such clothing in the polling place while actively engaged in the process of registering to vote or while actively engaged in the process of voting. In most instances, someone should be able to remove or cover up the offending attire. This could include asking someone to remove a cap, or perhaps having a stack of plain shirts to offer for someone to cover an offending t-shirt. However, if someone simply refuses to cover up or remove electioneering clothing, it is not advisable to restrict their constitutional right to cast a vote. The best approach would be to allow them to vote and report the incident to the Secretary of State’s office after the election.

Q. How do we control electioneering at the polling place without infringing on someone’s 1st Amendment right of free speech?

A. A state may regulate speech inside the polling place “as long as the regulation on speech is reasonable and not an effort to suppress expression merely because public officials oppose the speaker’s view.” Minn. Voters All. v. Mansky, 138 S. Ct. 1876, 885 (2018). Speech supporting or opposing a candidate or measure on the ballot at a polling place may be prohibited. This is because it is a reasonable time, place and manner restriction on electioneering. The government is not saying that you cannot express your support for a candidate or measure, the government is simply restricting the place where you may express those opinions. You are allowed to electioneer in the designated locations. Speech supporting a point of view not on the ballot at a polling place may not be prohibited. This is because prohibition a point of view would be a content based restriction, and therefore would violate the 1st Amendment. How is this different from electioneering? Here is an example: if someone wore a shirt advocating for a particular political party with a candidate on the ballot, that would be electioneering. If someone wore a shirt displaying the statement “support 2nd Amendment rights,” even if this sentiment is traditionally associated with a particular party, as long as there isn’t a measure specifically related to gun rights on the ballot, this shirt could not be prohibited as it is a view point, not a matter on the ballot.

Electioneering by local officials and town employees

Q. Are local officials or town employees ever allowed to show their support for a particular candidate or measure appearing on the ballot?

A. RSA 659:44 prohibits any election officer from electioneering while in performance of his/her official duties. The term “election officer” is defined as “any moderator, deputy moderator, assistant moderator, town clerk, deputy town clerk, city clerk, deputy

city clerk, ward clerk, selectman, supervisor of the checklist, registrar, or deputy registrar.” RSA 652:14. The Attorney General’s Office has interpreted RSA 659:44 as prohibiting any official action by an election official to endorse a candidate for office. According to the Attorney General’s Office it is a violation of RSA 659:44 for a select board to endorse a candidate for office while acting in their official capacity as an election official.

In addition, no public employee, as defined in RSA 273-A:1, IX, shall electioneer while in the performance of his or her official duties. No public employee shall use government property or equipment, including, but not limited to, telephones, facsimile machines, vehicles, and computers, for electioneering. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

However, this does not mean that local officials or town employees lose their rights as a private citizen to support the candidates and measures they care about. They could endorse a candidate or measure in their individual capacity by putting up a yard sign, canvassing in their free time, etc. The important distinction is to keep these actions separate from their official capacity and duties in town.

Q. Does this mean that the town cannot provide any information to its residents about issues being voted on without engaging in illegal electioneering?

A. No, not necessarily. However, it matters how the information is being provided. Remember, an important element to electioneering is advocating for or against something. It is common practice for the select board, library trustees, or other municipal entity to put together an informational pamphlet or flyer describing different measures appearing on the ballot, explaining the impact of each issue should it be approved or denied, and

giving any other relevant information geared towards voter education. The select board is also allowed to put its recommendation on warrant articles. Consequently, it is appropriate for an information pamphlet to mention the select board’s recommendation as it will appear on the ballot, but towns should be very careful not to expand their advocacy beyond those parameters.

Q. My name is appearing on the ballot for election. I am currently serving as an election official. Do I need to “recuse” myself from my election duties?

A. All election officials and inspectors of election, on the ballot seeking only an election official office, may perform their election official duties, such as a moderator on the ballot solely to be re-elected as moderator. All election officials on the ballot seeking an office other than a position as an election official are disqualified from handling marked ballots, counting votes, and may not be within the area designated for ballot counting within the guardrail during the counting of votes for an office for which he or she is a candidate. A person who is not a moderator, clerk, selectman, inspector of elections, or supervisor of the checklist, whose name appears on the ballot for an office other than as an election official, is disqualified from performing duties as an election official in that election. For example, a candidate for state representative cannot serve as a deputy moderator, assistant clerk, or ballot clerk. An inspector of election (ballot clerk) whose name is on the ballot for either an election official or other office is not disqualified from serving as a ballot clerk but may not handle marked ballots or count ballots.

Jonathan Cowal is the Municipal Services Counsel with the New Hampshire Municipal Association. He may be contacted at 603.224.7447 or at legalinquiries@nhmunicipal.org.

Tech Insights

Trends in Video Management for State Agencies

Trends in video surveillance and technology have continually evolved in the age of Smart Cities, AI and advanced analytics. For state agencies and local government this has represented yet one more area of modernization in their already long list of next-generation technology needs. The Federal Communications Commission hastened attention to these issues in 2022 by introducing a ban on equipment from certain manufacturers that creates a greater risk to national security. US regulators announced this decision based on concerns raised by US intelligence agencies about potential data breaches from Chinese-based equipment manufacturers. Many states followed suit, including New Hampshire.

Sidebar Callout: The governor of the state of New Hampshire issued Executive Order 2209 with the following message:

“…several Chinese companies that produce Telecommunications and Video/ Audio equipment and we reasonably believe use of these products may enable the manufacturer or vendor to:

• Collect sensitive citizen, financial or other business data.

• Enable Business Email Compromise and act as a vector for Ransomware Deployment.

• Conduct effective Cyber-espionage against government entities.

• Conduct surveillance and tracking of individual users.

• Use algorithmic modifications to conduct disinformation or misinformation campaigns.

In order to “preserve the safety, security, and privacy of the citizens of New Hampshire” a list of products can no longer be used in connection with a state network.

The Trends Driving Change in Video Solutions

Along with the government regulations, several other key trends are driving change in video management.

1. Edge Computing

Edge computing is continually becoming more pivotal in video surveillance because of the need to bring data processing directly to the camera itself. This simplifies the actual hardware infrastructure and drives more instant insights into video footage and rapid decision-making.

2. Smart Cities

Smart cities leverage technology to improve support and safety to its citizens. Video technology can optimize transportation, utilities and public safety. Modern video management solutions can capture and analyze critical information to enhance the overall protection and efficiency of community environments.

3. AI-Optimized Solutions

AI-driven surveillance cameras can allow law enforcement and security teams to sift through footage rapidly, which in turn sharpens their response times and elevates their situational awareness.

New Hampshire’s Approach

With all of this in mind, agencies have to consider the state of their video management systems. Several New Hampshire agencies have moved to a Cisco Meraki camera solution in recent years, providing a modern and scalable approach to video management. So when the State of New Hampshire faced the need to replace its own antiquated camera system, leaders had a good idea of where to start. The existing system required onprem hosted solutions with ongoing maintenance and

patching requirements to remain secure, which was not sustainable for growth. Based on the success of the Meraki cloud-based solution provided to other agencies, the State of New Hampshire elected to standardize the Meraki cameras throughout its operation.

The Meraki solution is cloud-hosted and doesn’t require ongoing maintenance for the municipality. The cloud reduces the amount of hardware that is onsite and provides a simplified means to monitor facilities.

About Cisco Meraki Cameras

Cisco Meraki MV smart cameras make it easy to keep citizens and government workers safer with intelligent tools and powerful advanced analytics. Video is stored and processed on the camera, and all configuration and management are done from the Meraki dashboard. This simplified architecture reduces the cost and complexity associated with traditional systems, and eliminates the need for NVRs, software or plugins. MV cameras provide zero-touch deployment and remote, centralized management through the cloud. Using just serial numbers, an

administrator can add devices to the Meraki dashboard and begin configuration before the hardware even arrives on site.

Through the web-based dashboard, operators can easily stream video and create video walls to monitor key areas at once. With granular access permissions, department heads and law enforcement can access footage from anywhere.

Meraki MV cameras are equipped with powerful AI capabilities that enable them to create custom solutions that enhance the safety and security of government organizations. These capabilities are made possible through advanced machine learning algorithms and cloud-based processing.

The Benefits of AI in Meraki MV Cameras:

• Enhanced Security: AI-powered features can help identify potential threats and improve overall security.

• Operational Efficiency: By automating tasks like person counting and occupancy monitoring, AI can streamline operations.

• Data-Driven Insights: The analytics generated by these cameras can provide valuable data for decision-making and business intelligence.

• Scalability: Meraki's cloud-based platform allows for easy management and scaling of AI capabilities across multiple cameras.

Procurement Simplified

As leaders consider the need for IT modernization efforts, procurement is almost always a top concern. New Hampshire agencies have the ability to purchase the Cisco Meraki cameras through the state NASPO contract, creating more streamlined access to the technology.

As agencies determine the response to executive orders protecting national security and initiatives supporting AI, modern video management is an important part of that plan for state and local government. Fortunately state contracts provide access to new solutions like Cisco Meraki. For more information on video management systems and their ideal path forward, contact Red River: info@ redriver.com.

UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL

Welcome to Up Close and Personal, a regular column in New Hampshire Town and City designed to give readers a closer look at NHMA Board members. This issue features Ryan Pope, Housing Navigator for the City of Dover.

What are your duties and responsibilities as Housing Navigator?

A. The role falls within the City’s Department of Planning & Community Development, and is primarily focused on identifying solutions to better meet the housing needs of residents through engagement and collaboration with a variety of community stakeholders. It began as a 2-year grant funded position created by the InvestNH program in 2022 but has since become a permanent staff position. The role is constantly evolving, but generally involves significant community engagement and education, data analysis, and staff support of various housing initiatives and programs.

"When speaking with particularly impassioned residents, I have been challenged to listen with the sole intention of understanding what is being shared."

What is your biggest challenge in performing your duties?

Housing is an enormously complex issue touched by forces well outside the control of any community. This complexity is further compounded by the fact that accommodating new housing options inherently changes the places where they are accommodated. While no place is excused from change, it is important to balance solutions to align with resident feedback and community values.

How has NHMA helped you to do your job?

Every community, big and small, has a part to play in resolving our statewide housing shortage. NHMA provides a unique forum for our towns and cities to collaborate, share practices, and learn from one another. I’m still very new to government, and the connections I’ve made through NHMA’s programming and member network have been invaluable. It’s remarkable to be part of an organization where everyone involved is working to make our communities stronger.

Give us an example of a problem you solved or a dilemma you faced and overcame in the line of duty?

While discussing potential barriers to new housing creation with residents, we learned that Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) were particularly difficult to finance with conventional lending products. We shared this feedback with the City’s local banks and credit unions and worked with them to create and im-

plement tailor-made loan programs to overcome the specific limitations cited in resident feedback. Solving the housing shortage will require participation from many sectors, and the several institutions offering these products are representative of the collaborative approach the City strives for.

What is the public perception about your job and how does it differ from the reality of your job?

A. It’s a unique role so perceptions vary pretty widely. Many residents assume I either direct policy decisions or provide assistance to those seeking housing and related services - neither of which I do. In

reality, my role is centered around understanding the local housing landscape, identifying the tools and stakeholders that could address pieces of it, and then pulling people and resources together to facilitate inclusive housing options. Simply said, I’m a community resource working to implement the community’s goals.

Has your public position changed you personally?

A. I frequently joke that my job is to talk to strangers, and those conversations range widely in tone and scope. When speaking with particularly impassioned residents, I have been challenged to listen with the

sole intention of understanding what is being shared. I’ve learned that there is value in every interaction and that realization has fundamentally changed the way I communicate.

Has your job changed the way you look at the role of government?

A. Most definitely. Prior to joining the City, I worked in financial services – a profession with an interesting regulatory relationship. Without getting into previous assumptions, I can safely say that my current view of government is more akin to the hub of a wagon wheel. Government is not only connected to the many aspects that make a community, but essential to its function and forward progress.

Unlock the Full Potential of Your NHMA Membership with Our Training Archive!

Our extensive Training Archive is a fantastic benefit available exclusively to NHMA members. Behind the member wall on our website, you'll find a wealth of recorded trainings, all accessible at no additional cost. These sessions are an invaluable resource for your ongoing learning and professional development.

This is just one of the many perks of being an NHMA member. Don't miss out–explore the Training Archive today and make the most of all your training membership benefits!

Head to NHMA website to get started!

NAME THAT TOWN OR CITY ? ? ?

? ?

This town was originally settled by Native Americans in 1624. It was a fishing settlement called by Native Americans "Massabesic" (the current name of the town's largest lake). British settlers arrived in the area in 1720 and made peace with the Natives until the French and Indian War. The Massabesic settlement was destroyed, and the nearby town of Chester claimed the land. It was known as "Chester Woods," "Chester West Parish," "Long Meadow," and then finally its current name. This town became an independent town on June 25, 1845, with a population of 1,200 people. As with the same named towns in Maine, Massachusetts and New York, the name is from Oliver Goldsmith's popular 18th-century poem, "The Deserted Village," which begins:

Sweet ____! loveliest village of the plain,

Where health and plenty cheered the laboring swain

Where smiling spring its earliest visit paid,

And parting summer's lingering blooms delayed

When you have figured out the answer, email it to maugustine@nhmunicipal.org. The answer will appear in the January/February 2025 issue.

ANSWER TO PHOTO IN THE SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER ISSUE:

The last issue of New Hampshire Town and City magazine is that of the Town of Bath.

Special thanks to Marshall Buttrick, Sur Girouard, and Boyd Chivers who responded with the correct answer!