NH State Representative Steven Smith

Today, the House Finance committee completed work on HB1 and HB2 including two additional amendments.

These amendments seek to resolve two key issues:

• Restoring $19 million to education stabilization grant funding to towns and cities
• Restoring $34 million per year in funding to the Department of Transportation

The amendments to HB1 and HB2 to address these issues did the following:

• Kept funding to the University System of New Hampshire at current FY14-15 levels. This freed up $14.5 million.
• Redirected $50.8 million from the Renewable Energy Fund to the General Fund.
• Replaced the Department of Safety allocation from the Highway Fund with $23 million per year from general funds.
• Redirected a portion of the revenue from the 4.2 cent road toll increase enacted in 2014 (SB367) to fund DoT operations, not just betterment.

As a result of these amendments, the Department of Transportation is funded at a level comparable to our current operating budget.

As a result of these amendments, funds were also available to restore $19 million in stabilization grants to cities and towns.

There are no additional or increased taxes or fees associated with these amendments.

Stabilization grants will continue at the Governor’s level for 2016. In 2017, for those towns that have had a decline in enrollment and could have expected a correlated reduction in funding, no town will lose more than $750,000. For those towns whose enrollment has climbed and have been affected by the cap, the cap is now removed and they will be fully funded. The amendment has mitigated the reduction in funding for dozens of communities.

Towns and cities will also continue to receive their current level of municipal block grants allocated from the pre-existing (18 cent) road toll.

Lastly, the committee approved an additional amendment appropriating $300,000 per year to the Fish and Game Department, with half of those funds being earmarked to support overtime costs for search and rescue operations.

The budget now ends with a $168,000 surplus which will fall to the “Rainy Day” fund.

House Republican Office

New Hampshire House of Representatives

State House Room 313, Concord, NH 03301

Why is the DOT Budget in a separate bill?

The problems facing the Department of Transportation are unique and serious. Dealing with the DOT budget separately through HB357 will allow the House more opportunity to discuss and debate the issues, facts, and figures specific to DOT.

I’ve heard there will be cuts to personnel and/or operations in DOT. If the gas tax was raised last year, in part, to help fund certain aspects of DOT, why the disparity from one budget to the next?

Over the last 3-4 budget cycles, there have been a number of one-time fixes and/or revenue sources that helped fund DOT. For example:

2008 – $65M Bonding of Operating Expenses
2010 – $46M Registration Surcharge (repealed in 2011)
$50M I-95 Transfer to Turnpikes
2012 – $52M I-95 Transfer to Turnpikes
2014 – $29M I-95 Transfer to Turnpikes

These one-time fixes along with the reduction of federal funding have resulted in what is estimated to be an $88.2 million deficit, if no new revenue source is identified or enacted. $88.2 million represents a reduction of over 40%.

Despite the 4 cent per gallon gas tax increase enacted in 2014 (SB367), revenue from the increase will not cover the large deficit. In fact, the majority of revenue from the increase is dedicated to specific items including resurfacing, municipal grants and I-93. In addition, overall revenue is expected to trend downward as vehicles become more efficient.

Is the current legislature to blame?

No. Actions (or inaction) by prior legislatures and administrations are the real culprit. The shell games and reliance on one-time revenue that has happened over the last 10 years have lead us to this situation. The chickens have come home to roost.

The proposal included in HB357 reflects a budget that lives within our current means, without raising the gas tax or registration fees. As a result, there is a stark reduction in funds available for our transportation infrastructure.

Will there be alternative solutions to this “live within our means” budget?

As with any budget bill, alternatives may be proposed in the form of floor amendments to HB357.

Should this budget be viewed as a negative reflection on DOT employees or management?

No. The vast majority of DOT employees and management are hardworking people who provide a great service to our state. The proposal in HB357 is in no way a suggestion that the House Finance Committee or the House of Representatives has a negative opinion of any individual employee or agency.

I’m getting a lot contacts about HB298 – “relative to the seasons for taking game animals and game birds with the use of bait”. This bill was effectively killed last week by a 12-2 vote. While the full House votes whether or not to accept the committee report, 12-2 decisions never get overturned. This bill is dead.