Saturday, April 15, 2017

=Legislative Update, 2017 #16== Update on SB247, Lead bill, Legislator contact needed this week. More bills have an updated status.




Howdee everyone,
 
Important Updates:
SB247, Lead Law
The House hearing did happen this past week
04/12/2017 at 10:30 AM    LOB Room 205-207
There were approximately 16 people that signed in to speak on the bill.  Of them only one spoke against the amended bill.  The one speaking against raised issue with the mandate on parents to test children for lead & mandate that children be tested before entering school.  All others spoke strongly in favor of the amended bill.
 
Assuming it passes this committee it will likely go before the House Finance committee because of the budget requirements in the bill.  There is a large chance the House Finance committee will have high resistance to the bill because of the remediation fund allocation from the general budget.
 
This version, As Amended By The Senate, is attached so check it out, (same as last week).  If you get this update directly from a source that does not forward attachments use these links.  If you would like to get the update directly please contact us.
 
170316 SB247 AsAmendedBySenateWithLineNumbers.pdf
 
170316 SB247 AsAmendedBySenateWithoutLineNumbers.pdf
 
We are continuing to monitor the bill to be on guard for any detrimental changes.  So stay tuned.
 
 
Action items this week:
1. Review the revised talking points and detailed summary of SB247, Lead Law, immediately below.
 
2. If not done so already contact the House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs committee, by email and phone, and ask them to vote to pass the bill as amended by the Senate with no further changes.
 
HHSEA@leg.state.nh.us; will email to all committee members
Contact info is available at 
 
3. Contact the House Finance committee, by email and phone, and ask them to vote to pass the bill as amended by the Senate with no further changes.  Especially give them reasons to approve the allocation for the lead remediation fund.  See point in the present version of the SB247 talking points.
 
 
 
See more info in Summaries & Full Detail for each bill further below. (includes property owner position, contact info, Talking points, and more).
(to jump right to bill detail, use Control-F, Find).
 
 
Many of the bills have an updated status
See Bills Updated Status summary below
In particular note the status of bills where we have a position For or Against that bill.
 
 
Hearings this week:
04/19/2017 at 10:15 AM    LOB Room 101
HB85, Allow Replacement of AFCI
Level of Response: Call, Email Legislators
Property Owner Position: For
 
 
Hearings next week:
None scheduled so far
 
 
Further below is:
Bills Updated Status summary
Full details on all bills above
(Which includes property owner position, contact info, talking points, and more)
 
Love & Light,
Nick Norman
Director of Legislative Affairs
==============================================
Talking points and detailed summary SB247, Lead Law
As Amended By The Senate
 
SB247 Lead Law.     Notes for House committees.
Property Owner Position: For As Amended By Senate
 
1. Support SB247 As Amended by the Senate.  No changes. Keep present balance of the bill.
The 3 year NH Lead Commission has been meeting for about a year and a half with many stake holders from all sides of the lead issue represented.
 
SB247 As Amended by the Senate, represents a balance which stake holders from all sides of the issue have agreed upon.  It is a movement forward to solving lead elevations in children and NH’s housing stock.  Lead is a complicated issue with many ramifications.  It is difficult to agree on a balance.  One seemingly small change can result in the balance completely lost.  It is important to keep the bill as amended by the Senate.
 
Landlord’s were originally extremely opposed to the original version of the bill which was an extreme over reach in legislation for an issue which is already being solved with present law.
 
2. Present lead law is working.
NH has seen a 91% drop in BLL >=10ug/dl from 1999 through 2015
Data captured for the range of >=5 to <10ug 2013="" dl="" shows="" span="" starting="">
2013 1019 elevations
2014  795 elevations
2015  548 elevations
Clearly what we are doing is working.
 
3. Landlords on commission have always said “No money, No bill”.
Lead is a societal issue and a money issue.  The government was very complicit in its use.  Present landlords did not put lead in their properties and they purchased the properties when government rules were far less strict.
All landlords want to eliminate lead from their properties.
No landlord wants to see a child harmed.
Eliminating lead is very expensive. We need the money to make it happen.
We need a large continuing annual allotment until all the lead is removed.
 
The $3 Million fund in this bill is a critical component of the balance of the bill which is why it is tied to the portions of the bill that will cause more abatement orders and dramatic costs to the housing industry. 
 
The lead remediation fund is also our best proactive, preemptive solution to elevations in children.  The return benefits to society as a whole are said to be $17/$1 or much more for every investment into lead remediation.
Again “No money, No bill”.
 
4. Lead testing in Water is unneeded
This is why the amended version of the bill only tests for water if a child has an elevated lead level.
DHHS has in 2016 been doing water testing during the abatement order process.  They have conducted about 40 water tests.  They say none have been above the EPA limit.  In fact none of them have tested above the detectable limit.
 
When water is delivered to the property without lead and containing the correct corrosiveness factor then there is no issue.
 
Section by Section analysis
 
Section 1: Parental Notification
Section 2: Landlord Notification
 
In present law we already get notices from 5 and above.  This would give us something we have asked for over many years, earlier notification.
 
None of us want to poison children and we will take appropriate proactive & corrective actions when we know there is a problem! Let’s catch the problem as early as possible. Good for the child; good for the landlord.
 
We cannot address a problem if we do not know it exists. If any landlord makes sure that at the commencement of a tenancy there is no peeling, caulking or flaking paint, but over time, use of the apartment, and damage to the paint surface creates a lead hazard, the landlord would most likely not know about it until the tenant informs the landlord, which tends not to occur if the tenant caused the damage, an inspection of the apartment, the tenant vacates, or the notification on the positive level.  
The sooner the lead hazard is remedied, the better it is for child not to be injured from the lead exposure.
 
Also, the earlier parents and landlords know then the quicker both can take simple reasonable low cost measures that protect the child rather than let the BLL rise into a more dangerous level for the child and also an extremely expensive lead abatement order for the property owner.
 
Section 3: Universal Testing
 
Lead advocates want to have more children tested.  While this is a good move for protecting children, if the target is achieved hit of moving to a 85% testing rate then this change will result in a significant increase in the number of and cost of increased lead abatement orders.
From DHHS numbers, 2015 showed 59 children measured at >=10ug/dl.
59 / present testing rate of 16% * 85% target rate = 313.
If those occurred in 4 families and we take the national average of $10,000 per unit to complete a lead order then the additional costs would be
(313 – 59) * 4 * $10,000= $10.1 Million / year.
 
This is why it important that testing remains tied to funding the Lead Remediation Fund.
 
Section 4:  Lead testing gateway to enter school
This is another idea lead advocates wanted to force more testing of children.
 
Section 5:  Creation of the Remediation of Lead in Water and Rental Housing Fund
Section 6:
 
This is perhaps the most critical part of the bill.  There is no question that the lead issue is a money issue.  See initial point 3 above.
 
Present landlords did not create this problem, the government authorized and in some cases required use of lead paint.  Landlords should not be entirely responsible for fixing it.  Some fund, from someplace, needs to be established so that society can pay for society’s problem.
 
Presently there is no state provided funding for lead remediation and the HUD grants administered by  Manchester, Nashua & the state have strings attached that sometimes make the money unavailable .
 
The paint can fee previously talked about has been dropped because several contacts in legislature have said the paint can fee which has previously been attempted is dead on arrival.   It is not in original bill and also not in the amended bill.
 
The remediation fund would be established by a $3 Million allocation from the state general fund for the fiscal year ending 6/30/18 & next ending 6/30/19.
 
Section 7:  Child Day Care must follow lead laws.
Section 8:
Landlords are neutral on this point but think it is only reasonable that Day care must follow lead laws like properties owners are required to do.
 
Section 9:  Medical insurance companies must cover cost of blood lead testing
Section 10:
Section 11:
Section 12:
Section 13:
Section 14:
Landlords are neutral on this point.
 
Section 15:  Sales disclosure, has more language on lead
Landlords are neutral on this point.
 
This is a very low cost item to implement, and more information being given to buyers, many of whom maybe first time buyers looking to start a family could help reduce lead poisonings. Children who live in single family homes are a significant percentage of the children who have been found to have high blood lead levels.
 
Section 16: Lead in Drinking Water in School and Child Care Facilities
Landlords are neutral on this point but because of the occurrence of old “bubblers” think that it is a good idea.
 
Section 17:  Identification and Disclosure of Lead in Public Water Systems.
Landlords feel that it is important to make sure the water being delivered to our properties is good before we are required to remediate lead in water which might not be from our building but actually delivered to us with lead in the water already or leaching from distribution systems because the water it too corrosive.
 
However, the wording seems weak.  Water systems have to make reasonable efforts but don’t have to excavate to prove anything.  Still it is a good start.
 
It makes no sense to address the effect (water in the property) without addressing the cause (water delivered to the property). An easy source of lead to identify and a broadly distributed product that requires quality assurance.
 
Section 18:  Testing of lead in water in rental property.
 
This has been debated extensively on the lead commission.  This section as amended by the Senate represents the agreement of stakeholders involved.
 
See initial point 4 above.
 
This latest agreement makes the most sense because there is no need for a universal testing of water at the property.  Also, we hear that DHHS may want to limit the testing to cases where the child measures 10ug/dl or above. Landlords are ok with that change and it would keep everything in line with the present action level of 10ug/dl.
 
Section 19:  Increased record keeping 3 to 10ug/dl
This is important for discovering the impact of increased testing resulting from the Universal Testing portions of the bill.
 
Section 20: Appropriates the read remediation fund
 
Section 21:  Universal Testing contingent on lead remediation fund
Section 22:
Section 23:
 
21,22,23 as a package set up the tie in of increased testing to the lead remediation fund.  This is a critical feature of the balanced bill negotiated by the stake holders involved.  See notes on Section 3.
 
Section 24:  Effective dates.
==============================================
Bills Updated Status summary:
We only list the committee reports on the most important bills affecting the real estate business.  If you want to get the committee report on one of the other bills contact me & I will show you how to get them on line.  It’s not terribly hard to get but not straight ahead either.
 
HB415, Establish an Income Tax, Reduce or Eliminate Other Taxes     
Title: reducing business taxes, repealing certain taxes, establishing an income tax, and requiring payment by the state of a portion of retirement system contributions of political subdivision employers.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
General Status: HOUSE
House Status: INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE
Senate Status: none
 
HB489, Commission To Study The Tax Structure Of The State     
Title: (New Title) establishing a commission to study adaptation of the tax structure of the state to economic and demographic change.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
General Status: SENATE
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: REPORT FILED: 
 
HB172, Enabling Counties to borrow against anticipated taxes     
Title: relative to tax anticipation notes in counties.
Property Owner Position: You Decide
General Status: SENATE
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED
Senate Status: CONSENT CALENDAR REPORT FILED
 
HB502, Condo Financial Information Available To Unit Owners     
Title: relative to the availability of condominium financial information to unit owners.
Property Owner Position: For
General Status: SENATE
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: CONSENT CALENDAR REPORT FILED
 
HB85, Allow Replacement of AFCI     
Title: (New Title) relative to installation requirements for arc-fault circuit interrupters.
Property Owner Position: For
General Status: SENATE
House Status: PASSED/ADOPTED WITH AMENDMENT
Senate Status: IN COMMITTEE
==============================================
Full details on all bills above:
HB489, Commission To Study The Tax Structure Of The State
03/15/2017 at 09:45 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: (New Title) establishing a commission to study adaptation of the tax structure of the state to economic and demographic change.
 
Summary: The bill would establish a commission to study the state's tax structure.
 
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 
 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB489 
 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
 
Talking Points:
Rather than enact an income tax, repeal interest and dividend taxes and 
the other changes proposed in the tax bills introducted this year without any actual understanding of the impact of these proposed changes, this bill would at least have a commission study how the tax structure does effect everyone in the state.  However, this bill would only consider how to reduce the burden of property taxes in the state.  The commission should also study how to keep the State competitive with other states in regard to taxes.
=====================
HB172, Enabling Counties to borrow against anticipated taxes
03/22/2017 at 09:30 AM    LOB Room 102
Title: Title: relative to tax anticipation notes in counties.
 
Summary: This bill would give counties the authority to borrow against anticipated taxes for current expenses. We don't see any direct impact on residential landlords.
 
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 
 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB172 
 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
 
Talking Points:
We're basically just letting you know this bill is here incase you think it may impact you.  Not sure we have the knowledge to take a position on the bill.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
HB502, Condo Financial Information Available To Unit Owners
04/04/2017 at 02:00 PM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to the availability of condominium financial information to unit owners.
 
Summary: Financial Information shall be provided within 15 days of request and 30 days prior to annual meeting.  Unit owners shall have access to P&L salaries etc.
 
Property Owner Position: For
 
 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB502 
 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
 
Talking Points:
This provides more transparency.  There is no reason why condo owners should be prevented from access to the financial information of the condo association.  After all, some of the funds come from that owner, and how the funds are spent affects that owner.
 
Unfortunately there is no enforcement mechanism if the law is not followed. The condo association could ignore any request.
=====================
HB386, Technical Corrections To The Education Tax Credit 
04/05/2017 at 09:15 AM    SH Room 100
Title: Title: relative to technical corrections to the education tax credit statute.
 
Summary: Seems to have little impact on landlords.
 
Property Owner Position: You Decide
 
 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB386 
 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
 
Talking Points:
We have not studied this bill and are basically just letting you know this bill is here incase you think it may impact you.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
HB85, Allow Replacement of AFCI
04/19/2017 at 10:15 AM    LOB Room 101
Title: Title: (New Title) relative to installation requirements for arc-fault circuit interrupters.
 
Summary: The bill would allow "after repeated tripping of an AFCI device and
determination the branch circuit is not causing the AFCI to trip, that an AFCI device may be replaced with one without AFCI protection". However, the change has to be reported to the residents of the affected housing unit.
 
Property Owner Position: For
 
 
Email to Committee: 
Subject: HB85 
 
Analysis Stated in Bill: 
 
Talking Points:
Seems to be a common sense solution to a very specific problem.  We have not studied this bill and are basically just letting you know this bill is here incase you think it may impact you.  If you learn more please let us know.
=====================
==============================================
==============================================
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)