This past week, the House Municipal and County Committee concluded its work for the session with thoughtful discussion and bipartisan cooperation on several key local governance issues. Of the five Senate Bills we addressed, four received unanimous or near-unanimous support and are now on the consent calendar, where they are expected to follow the committee recommendation without further debate unless pulled for discussion.
SB 42 received an 18-0 vote of support and offers a compassionate and practical update to estate proceedings. It allows families to file a notice of death affidavit at their county Registry of Deeds to help transfer real property without having to endure the lengthy and costly probate process. For families already navigating grief, this change simplifies a cumbersome legal step and, in many cases, can eliminate the need for hiring an attorney.
SB 78, also passed unanimously with an amendment, extends the time period during which individuals may appeal to a local zoning board of adjustment. With an additional 15 days now allowed, both developers and residents gain a fairer, more predictable process for land use decisions.
Two other bills — SB 217 and SB 225-FN-LOCAL — were found to be well-meaning but ultimately impractical in their current forms. SB 217 aimed to improve transparency by requiring local governments to post historic tax rate data and project impact information on their websites. However, the committee determined that requiring complex charts and project summaries on a homepage could cause confusion rather than provide clarity for taxpayers. By a vote of 17-1, the committee deemed it Inexpedient to Legislate.
SB 225-FN-LOCAL proposed a mandatory 45-day notice before reassessment notices could be sent to taxpayers in larger municipalities. While the bill was a response to a specific revaluation incident in Nashua, its broad application posed significant logistical challenges for municipalities across the state. Without enforcement provisions or flexibility for court-ordered changes, the committee voted 18-0 against advancing the bill.
The final bill, SB 105, drew a more divided response. This enabling legislation would allow towns to adopt local budget caps, similar to those already in place for cities and school districts. The majority of the committee supported the bill with an amendment, noting it empowers local voters to manage budgets responsibly through a formula based on per-resident expenditures. Caps could be adjusted annually using inflation indexes or a fixed percentage, offering flexibility while preserving local control through the requirement of a 3/5 supermajority vote.
However, the minority voiced serious concerns. They argued that the bill gives too much authority to the governing body by allowing it to select the inflation index without permitting voters to amend that choice at town meetings. Additionally, the high bar to change the cap formula could lock communities into flawed or outdated systems, potentially straining vital public services.
As we approach final budget votes in June, this marks my last biweekly update for the session. It has been a privilege to share this work with you, and I remain committed to policies that reflect both local values and common-sense governance.
