Nanny rates

On Wednesday, the House defeated a bill to re-allow a variation of so-called “payday loans” — short-term, high-interest loans — that lawmakers banned in 2009. The vote on Senate Bill 160 was narrow at 186-179, and the issue generated passion and contrasting views on the role of government.

“What have we come to? We were elected to get government off our backs and no more nanny states. I’m really disturbed,” said Rep. Steve Vaillancourt (R-Manchester).

“This will make loan sharking an acceptable business,” said Rep. Donna Schlachman (D-Exeter). “It’s state-regulated usury.”

Stuck in the middle

A Senate committee has voted to kill a House measure that would withdraw New Hampshire from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Sen. Jeb Bradely (R-Wolfeboro) is trying to keep RGGI alive, but make it a whole lot different.

“There are people who want to keep the program exactly as is, and there are people who want to repeal outright. We’ve got a long way to go with this,” Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro) told the Concord Monitor about the amendment to House Bill 519 he plans to introduce on the Senate floor next Wednesday.

The article says his plan would lower the cap for the price of carbon from $9 per ton to $1 per ton (it’s currently $1.86). It would also turn that money back over to utilities, rather than use it to fund a state-administered grant program for renewable and efficient energy projects.

Power pleas

The House voted 261-104 to pass its version of Senate Bill 148, which would return any federal grant money for health care reform and force the state Attorney General to join the multi-state lawsuit against the law. The debate on the House floor was pointed and sharp.

“We don’t want to do anything, anything that will allow this federal law to plant its poisonous seeds in our state,” said Rep. Andrew Manuse (R-Derry).

“I urge you to read article 37 (of the state Constitution), use your common sense, deny this lust for power and defeat this amendment,” said Rep. Gary Richardson (D-Hopkinton).

Accounting jujitsu

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro (D-Manchester) was puzzled by a Senate Finance Committee amendment to House Bill 635. It would cut the Department of Corrections budget by $10.5 million by sending 600 prisoners from the state prison in Concord to an as-yet unknown location run by private companies.

“I really didn’t see any materials that indicated we could save $10.5 million. I didn’t know where they were going, how they were going to get there, what the costs would be,” said D’Allesandro, who was the only Finance Committee member to vote against the bill.

On Wednesday, the full Senate did not take up the amendment and the bill was returned to the Finance Committee.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

What quotables have you read or heard that you think reveal the verbal tenor of the 2011 legislative session? Email suggestions for the Daily Briefing to NH@FrontDoorPolitics.com.

Gas (tax cut) fumes

There’s been no shortage of talk about Senate Bill 78, which would cut the state gasoline tax by five cents a gallon through June 30. The measure passed the House this week, 208-98.

“This bill is good for our economy and will give welcome relief to the drivers of the state who are facing soaring gas prices.” — House Speaker William O’Brien.

When asked by the Concord Monitor if he would veto the bill if it reached his desk, Gov. John Lynch said it’s unlikely the Senate would follow the House’s lead. “I don’t believe it’s going to get to me. I don’t worry about political gimmicks,” he said.

House Majority Leader D. J. Bettencourt touted the economic benefits of SB 78. “While a five cent decrease may not seem like much at face value, it will add up when motorists fill their tanks each week. And as a resident of the border town of Salem, I am also confident that lower prices in New Hampshire will encourage those living along the border in Massachusetts to come here and purchase gas along with lottery tickets, liquor and other consumables,” he said.

Portsmouth blogger William Tucker of miscellany: blue had this take on the economic benefits of SB 78 that Bettencourt cited. “Majority Leader Bettencourt suggests Massachusetts’ drivers are going to head to New Hampshire to fill their gas tanks if the state cuts the gas tax by five cents per gallon. Let’s check the numbers. If we assume the entire savings is passed along to consumers (which is not guaranteed), a driver buying 20 gallons of gas would save $1.00. At $4.00 a gallon, if our Massachusetts driver has a car that gets 32 miles to the gallon, he would have to live within four miles of a New Hampshire gas station just to break even. Not likely.”

RGGI reactions

The House voted to prohibit New Hampshire’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), but some Senators aren’t enthused. Sen. Nancy Stiles (R-Hampton) told the Portsmouth Herald that RGGI could be saved through Senate amendments to the bill. “The broad stroke is to save this bill in any way we can save it. There are always opportunities for amendments to come until the last gun is fired. But the most important thing is to make sure we have the components in there that will allow a majority of the senators to support it,” she said.

Andrew Hemingway, chair of Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, says RGGI isn’t worth saving. “While there are many fallacies about the merits of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the erroneous idea that the program stimulates job growth is keeping a few of the enamored hanging on…When government uses tax dollars to stimulate job growth, it is taking money by force from people who are producing wealth honestly and giving it to people who cannot create wealth on their own because there isn’t enough demand for their products. It’s never good when government picks the winners and the losers. In the case of RGGI, everyone is a loser,” he said in an opinion piece.

This Daily Briefing was written by Michael McCord.

Make your own quotes, below! (Comments policy here.)

The often adversarial nature of politics — this session in the New Hampshire Legislature being no exception — begs the question of what it takes to find common ground. The reality is complicated. For all their public bickering, lawmakers often do get along, especially at the committee level. But that fact of life doesn’t make many headlines.

Enter the pharmaceutical drug take-back program.

The bill, which we’ve tracked since January, creates a new way for New Hampshire cities and towns to confront the issues of pain medicine addiction and water supply degradation. Several state agencies collaborate in setting guidelines for how communities and private entities, in conjunction with law enforcement, can collect unused medications. It’s “enabling” legislation, or a law that allows communities to take part in the program on a volunteer process. The goal is keeping prescription drugs off the street and out of the water supply (which happens when people flush old meds).

An earlier proposal had called for pharmacies to establish take-back programs, but a study committee recommended against it due to corporate liability issues. Lesson learned, a new mechanism was created. House Bill 71 is the product of a successful pilot program last fall — in which more than a ton of unused pharmaceuticals was collected statewide — followed by fine-tuning from legislative interim study recommendations.

Later today, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hold a public hearing on HB 71, which passed uncontested by a voice vote in the House last month. Sponsored by Rep. Chris Nevins (R-Hampton), the bill enjoys significant bipartisan support.

>> Thursday, April 7, 1:00 p.m., Senate Health and Human Services Committee public hearings on HB 71 and other bills (Legislative Office Building, Room 102).

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord, with contributions from Hilary Niles.

What’s your impression: Is the bipartisan time, effort and study that went into HB 71 the exception or the rule in New Hampshire’s legislative process? As a reader and a citizen of the Granite State, would you like to hear more of the success stories, or should media focus on the fights?

Share your thoughts in the comments box below (see policy first, please)!

The captain of this rowboat will no longer have to check his speed if Senate Bill 27 is passed.

The proposals include eliminating the state motor vehicle registration surcharge, repealing boating speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee, and establishing a managed care platform for the state’s Medicaid program.

Kill the Surcharge

Senate Bill 78 – A motor vehicle registration surcharge enacted in 2009 as a two-year temporary funding measure could die sooner.

Sponsored by Sen. Andy Sanborn (R-Henniker), SB 78 would immediately repeal a 2009 provision that raised registration fees and surcharges for certain vehicles — from $35 to $75 depending on the size of vehicle. The resulting revenue is designated for “highway and bridge betterment.” Sanborn’s proposal would reinstall the previous fee structure and eliminate the surcharges, which are due to expire June 30.

The bill’s fiscal note says revenues for the Department of Transportation would decrease by about $6.59 million. That reduction would decrease state highway fund expenditures and local revenue an estimated $791,000 for fiscal year 2012.

Senate Bill 78 passed in the Senate Ways and Means Committee by a 6-0 vote with an “Ought to Pass” recommendation to the full Senate.

Lake Speed

Senate Bill 27 – Two years ago, lawmakers enacted a speed limit on Lake Winnipesaukee: 45 mph during the daytime and 30 mph at night. Now, a proposal sponsored by Sen. Lou D’Allensandro (D-Manchester) would replace that with no speed limit at all.

D’Allesandro’s bill would instead require boaters on any body of water to “proceed at a safe speed that is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions,” with conditions like visibility, weather, and radar use to be considered in determining a safe speed.

The bill’s supporters say common sense boating shouldn’t be replaced by limits of personal freedom, while opponents say safety has been enhanced and the lake is more family-friendly with the current speed limit in place.

The bill was reported out of the Senate Transportation Committee with an “Ought to Pass” recommendation by a slim 3-2 vote.

Managed Shift

Senate Bill 147 – Sponsored by Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro), SB 147 would set up a five-year contract with private vendors to manage the state’s Medicaid program.

Supporters say the long-term savings with a managed care program could amount to tens of millions of dollars not spent in administrative costs. In the bill’s fiscal note, the Department of Health and Human Services said it was difficult to determine what costs could be saved at this time. The Department provided the following information:

• In 2009, a leading health care actuarial firm, Milliman, Inc., reviewed NH Medicaid claims and conducted actuarial analysis to determine the viability of Medicaid managed care in NH. Their report identified factors that impact the ability of the state to achieve savings utilizing managed care. The existing reimbursement rates, size of the Medicaid caseload, administrative costs, and wrap-around responsibility were factors.
• New Hampshire’s reimbursement rates and administrative costs are comparatively low.
• The federal law requiring states to offer choice to recipients would require at least two managed care organizations to serve Medicaid enrollees.
• States must provide wrap around services; all services required by federal law including services which may not be included in the managed care benefit package.
• The Department issued a Request for Information in July, 2010 to solicit ideas from the managed care industry. Twelve entities responded and none of the responses offered savings. Most of the respondents stated they would need 6 to 9 months from the date of contract approval to program start up. Therefore the Department assumed there could be no fiscal impact until FY 2013.
• The New Hampshire Medicaid program currently utilizes most of the tools used in managed care including prior authorization, care management, and pharmacy benefit management.
• Based on the experience of other states, an up front investment is necessary as two claims adjudication systems are needed for the first 6 months after the transition date. The old MMIS system would continue to operate for 6 months since providers have 6-12 months to submit claims for services provided and new the claims would be processed through the new managed care system.
• Federal approvals required at various points in the procurement process may increase the timeline for implementation.

Senate Bill 147 unanimously passed Senate Finance Committee with an “Ought to Pass” recommendation.

>> Wednesday, March 23, full Senate session beginning 10 a.m. at the State House.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

In particular, we’ll focus on the state Senate, which meets in session Wednesday to consider more than 34 bills and amendments.

The proposals cover a wide range of issues — from a constitutional amendment giving the governor line item veto authority over the state budget to increasing the allowable size of off-highway recreational vehicles on state trails.

It’s all a part of government, folks.

Charge It

Senate Bill 56 >> This would allow the Department of Revenue Administration to accept tax payments by credit and debit card. Sponsored by Sen. Robert Odell (R-Lempster), SB 56 also would allow the DRA to enact a usage service charge.

The bill’s fiscal note says New Hampshire currently handles some 265,000 checks every two years, at a cost of $592,553 annually. Plus, the note indicates, the state pays about $87,000 annually for armored car services and $18,550 in bank fees. Senate Bill 56 passed the Senate Finance Committee with a unanimous 7-0 vote.

Line Item

CACR 5 >> New Hampshire is one of six states in which the governor does not have line item veto power over the state budget, but CACR 5 sponsor Sen. Chuck Morse (R-Salem) would like to change that.

In short, a line item veto allows a governor to edit a bill line by line. In this case, it would only apply to spending bills, meaning the governor would be able to take some spending provisions out of a budget, while leaving other parts intact. And the “veto” implies that the governor could only take certain provisions out of a budget, but wouldn’t be able to add any in.

The issue has had far more attention at the Congressional level than in Concord over the years. If CACR 5 passes through the Senate and House by a 3/5 margin in each body, it would go before the voters in 2012. The measure passed the Senate Internal Affairs Committee with a 3-0 vote.

Wider Trails

Senate Bill 100 >> Sponsored by Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry), this would increase the allowable size of off-highway recreational vehicles (OHRVs) on any designated state-owned trail.

The OHRV size limit would increase from 50 to 65 inches in width and from 1,000 pounds to 1,600 pounds in weight. The bill passed unanimously out of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee by a 5-0 vote.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

To prepare for the flurry of activity, today we begin a series of dispatches looking at some of the bills we’ve followed from early stages through public hearings and committee votes. We start with bills that are on the “consent,” or voice vote calendar.

This process bundles up scores of new pieces of legislation and lets lawmakers agree to the committee recommendations on each bill, all by voicing just one vote. The official name for killing a bill is voting it “Inexpedient to Legislate,” commonly shortened to ITL. Short for “Ought to Pass,” an OTP recommendation means the committee supports the bill in question.

To help you follow along, the committee names in bold are linked to previous Front Door Politics dispatches covering these bills.

Education

The committee gave a unanimous Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) recommendation for House Bill 39, which targeted the state’s curriculum requirements for an adequate education.

Election Law

House Bill 223, which would eliminate election-day voter registration, received an ITL recommendation.

Executive Departments and Administration

Back in November, we highlighted the progress of a study committee looking into establishing a state meat inspection service. House Bill 339 would establish just such a service, and received a unanimous Ought to Pass (OTP) committee recommendation.

Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs

Two pharmaceutical take-back bills are headed for passage after receiving unanimous OTP committee recommendations. House Bill 71 would allow communities and private entities to establish drug take-back programs, and House Bill 426 would allow for institutions such as nursing homes and correctional facilities to re-allocate unused drugs.

Municipal and County Government

House Bill 144, a proposal to repeal the PACE, or clean energy district legislation from last year, has been amended to changes some funding mechanisms in a way that satisfied committee concerns about the new program. The PACE changes are headed for passage after a unanimous OTP recommendation by the committee.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

The House Science, Energy and Technology Committee will meet in Representatives Hall to consider two measures:

• House Bill 648, denying all eminent domain petitions to any large-scale transmission project, sponsored by Rep. Laurence Rappaport (R-Colebrook)
• House Bill 649, establishing guidelines for regional planning commissions to do separate economic and social impact studies on the Northern Pass project, sponsored by Rep. Rick Ladd (R-Haverhill)

In its current incarnation, Northern Pass calls for building 140 miles of direct-current transmission line in New Hampshire, from the Canadian border to a converter terminal in the City of Franklin (the terminal would convert Canadian direct current application to American alternating current). The 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydro-power would then be sent to a substation in Deerfield and connected to the New England power grid. An estimated 45 miles of new right-of-way agreements would be needed in the North Country for 135-foot-tall transmission towers, to be spaced about 800 feet apart.

Opponents such as the organization Bury the Northern Pass say the privately financed project will mar the landscape, drive down property values and generate little economic benefit beyond the converter station. Passions ran high last month when a hearing about changing the state’s renewable energy portfolio standards to include large-scale hydro-power was seen as an endorsement of the Northern Pass project. Dozens of people showed up to speak against Northern Pass, and the related did not make it out of committee.

If it goes forward, the Northern Pass transmission lines would be built, owned and maintained by Northern Pass Transmission LLC, a subsidiary of Northeast Utilities (which also owns PSNH). On the Canadian side, Hydro Renewable Energy Inc. (a subsidiary of Hydro-Quebec) would pay transmission fees to Northern Pass Transmission.

>> Wednesday, March 9, public hearings on HB 648 and HB 649 in the House Science, Energy and Technology Committee, Representatives Hall at the State House, beginning at 10:15 a.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Our midstream progress report on the N.H. Legislature continues today, checking up on the status of some featured legislation we’ve covered so far this session.

For more background on each bill, click the links to the corresponding dispatches in the bolded heading.

Retirement System Fix

The latest Republican-backed proposal to overhaul the state retirement system has its first public hearing this Friday. Senate Bill 3, sponsored by Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro), has started its legislative journey in the Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee.

No Adequacy Change

A bill to redefine education adequacy was rejected by the House Education Committee. Rep. Ralph Boehm (R- Litchfield) proposed eliminating the current statewide requirements for education in the arts, world languages, health and technology. These are among the components of an adequate education that school districts must provide, according to a law passed in 2007 to meet state Supreme Court guidelines.

Boehm, vice-chair of the House Education Committee, had argued that local communities should have the right to determine the definition of an adequate education for their students. On Feb. 24, the House Education Committee voted 15-0 to recommend against Boehm’s bill. House Bill 39 is scheduled for a March 16 vote in the full House.

Members Only

A bill to restrict membership on House study committees to lawmakers is scheduled for a vote Tuesday by the House Legislative Administration Committee. Sponsored by Rep. Laurie Harding (D-Lebanon), House Bill 190 has received bipartisan support.

The measure follows a strong bipartisan House vote last year instituting a rule (not a formal law) that limits membership on House study committees to legislators. Previously, some study committees had invited members of the public, industry experts, or representatives from state agencies to serve.

RGGI Repeal Passes in House

Since December, we have followed a proposal to repeal a 2008 law and remove New Hampshire from the 10-state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. House Bill 519 is sponsored by Rep. Richard Barry (R-Merrimack).

After a daylong hearing earlier this month, the bill was recommended for passage by a party line vote in the House Science, Energy and Technology Committee. It then passed the House Wednesday, 246 to 104. Before heading to the Senate, HB 519 will have a second trip in the House through the House Finance Committee.

Rethinking Renewables Gets Rethought

A few days after we wrote the headline “Renewable Energy Could Get a Whole Lot Bigger,” the bill at the heart of the dispatch (House Bill 302) died in its committee at the request of its own sponsor. Rep. Richard Barry (R-Merrimack) said he hadn’t planned on stirring up any controversy when he proposed making large-scale hydroelectric power part of New Hampshire’s renewable energy portfolio.

His proposal, however, drew out critics of the Northern Pass electric transmission line project in the northern part of the state. They were joined by supporters of solar energy development, which would have been impacted by a change in the law. The Renewable Portfolio Standards law also was already up for review later this year.

On Feb. 15, the full House agreed by voice vote with a unanimous House Science, Energy and Technology Committee recommendation to kill the legislation.

Hemp Not

The latest attempt to legalize the growing of industrial hemp was rejected by lawmakers. As we reported in early February, Rep. Derek Owen (D-Hopkinton) has sponsored at least seven similar bills since 1998. This year’s effort met the same fate as previous attempts. House Bill 101 was rejected by an 11-7 vote in the Environment and Agriculture Committee, in part because federal law prohibits the growing of industrial hemp. By a 304-51 roll call vote, the full House voted down HB 101 on Feb. 15.

Sex Registry Study Committee Measure Rejected

A bipartisan proposal to study the effectiveness of the state’s sex offender registry did not get much support in committee or in the full House. House Bill 122 was sponsored by Rep. James MacKay (D-Concord) and Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry). The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee recommended House Bill 122 be killed, and the full House concurred in a voice vote on Feb. 15.

House Votes to Defund NHPTV

The House Finance Committee is again considering a proposal to prohibit any state funds from being sent to New Hampshire Public Television. House Bill 113, sponsored by Rep. Steve Vaillancourt (R-Manchester), already passed the same committee and the full House by a 262-102 vote on Feb. 15.

All bills dealing with spending that pass full chamber votes are sent to the Finance Committee for second consideration — even bills that started there. If, as expected, it passes again through the same bodies, HB 113 will move to Senate.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Today and Monday, we offer a pair of dispatches checking in on the legislation Front Door Politics has highlighted so far this session. For more background on each bill, click the links to the corresponding dispatches in the bolded heading.

And for a calendar check: In less than two weeks, all bills have to be “reported” out of committee, meaning committee members must recommend specific action on each bill, which is then voted on by the entire chamber. Then comes Crossover on March 31, the deadline for all bills from the House “cross over” to the Senate, and vice versa. To brush up more on how new laws get made in New Hampshire, visit the primer in our Online Learning Center.

Wetlands

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee considered two wetlands bills in mid-January that would change the definition of wetlands. The goal of Senate Bills 19 and 21 was to help making permitting and development easier for the construction industry. Both bills passed the Senate earlier this month and have moved to the House Resources, Recreation and Development Committee.

Time Discrepancy

We reported in January on the bill that would correct an anomaly in the time-space continuum: New Hampshire state law doesn’t match federal law when it comes to the correct dates for Daylight Savings Time. A remedy was approved by the House with a voice vote on Feb. 15. The Senate is the next stop for House Bill 61.

No Referendum

We highlighted in January a pair of election law proposals. One would have created a recall process for U. S. Senators (House Bill 73) and the other was a Constitutional amendment request (CACR 3) for a referendum statute. Both measures were deemed Inexpedient to Legislate by the House Election Law Committee. The full House concurred by defeating both in voice votes earlier this month.

Pharmaceutical Programs

In January, the House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs Committee began considering a pair of bills on recycling of unused drugs and a pharmaceutical take-back program. House Bill 111 (reuse) passed by a voice vote in the full House on Feb. 9 and has moved to the Senate. Despite a unanimous “Ought to Pass” recommendation by the committee, House Bill 71 (take-back program) was sent back to the committee. Another public hearing has been scheduled for March 3.

Very Cold Case

A bipartisan proposal (House Bill 138) to establish a permanent State Police “Cold Case” unit to work on unsolved homicide cases has been put in the legislative equivalent of the freezer. The measure is being “retained” in the Criminal Justice & Public Safety Committee.

Require or Encourage?

A Republican-sponsored bill ordering the N.H. Attorney General to join the multi-state lawsuit opposing last year’s federal health care reform law passed the House 267-103 on Feb. 9. House Bill 89 was then sent to a second committee, Constitutional Review and Statutory Recodification, where a public hearing was held Tuesday and an executive has been scheduled for March 1. The measure faces a semantic hurdle in the Senate, where a majority of Republicans said Tuesday they promise to pass their own version that would encourage but not require the attorney general to join the lawsuit. Stay tuned.

Kindergarten Stays

The full House turned back a measure to repeal the 2007 law mandating kindergarten in all New Hampshire’s school districts. The House Education Committee deemed House Bill 631 Inexpedient to Legislate, and the full House concurred by a 223-134 roll call vote to defeat the measure.

>> March 10: Deadline for all bills to be reported out of their first committees.

>> March 31: Crossover

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord.

Sponsored by Rep. Beatriz Pastor (D-Lyme), PACE became law last year, but hasn’t yet been used. A move to repeal it will be considered in an executive session in the House Municipal and County Government Committee today. But Pastor tells Front Door Politics that Republican committee leaders gave her a chance to change PACE in order to save it.

This rooftop solar electric system is at work on a rooftop in Durham, NH. (photo courtesy Revision Energy)

The PACE program allows cities and towns to finance residential and commercial energy efficiency and clean energy projects through municipal loans of up to $35,000. Each loan is to be paid back by the property owner who receives it, through increased tax payments for up to 20 years.

PACE supporters say the program meets a financing need banks and other forms of financing have yet to fill – and would help local taxpayers save significant amounts of money on their energy use.  (See an earlier Daily Dispatch here for more explanation about the debate over PACE.)

Rep. Carol McGuire (R-Epsom) disagrees. She opposed the original PACE legislation, and told Front Door Politics in January that it was “not good public policy,” presented too much risk for local taxpayers, and “would benefit the few at the expense of everybody else.” McGuire sponsored this year’s PACE repeal bill, House Bill 144, which goes to executive session today.

The repeal bill was originally scheduled for a committee vote on Jan. 27, but Pastor says committee chair Rep. Beverly Ferrante (R-Derry) and vice-chair Rep. Franklin Sterling (R-Jaffrey) gave her time to address “the concerns the committee” had about the original legislation. Those concerns included

• the type of bonds that municipalities could use to set up the revolving loan funds to finance energy improvements
• how to establish a municipal “loss loan” program to protect municipalities against possible default by property owners who get the loans, and
• clarifying whose repayment would be prioritized (the municipality or a mortgage holder) in case of default

“We have proposed amendments to answer those concerns,” Pastor says. In particular, she says the issue of repayment precedence — which has been complicated by federal mortgage regulations — has been solved by only allowing residential applicants who no longer have mortgages to use the program (commercial property applicants fall under different guidelines).

“For communities who choose to go down this road, we have made it strong enough to get it started and to work in a narrow framework,” Pastor says. She adds that the process “has been truly bipartisan.”

That acknowledgement is brought into relief by an even bigger energy debate falling mainly along party lines. The House voted 246 to 104 Wednesday to repeal the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). House Bill 519 now goes to the House Finance Committee before crossing over to the Senate.

>> Thursday, Feb. 24, Municipal and County Government Committee, executive session on HB 144, Legislative Office Building, Room 301, 1 p.m.

This Daily Dispatch was written by Michael McCord, with contributions from Hilary Niles.