HB1136

RE: Opposition to HB 1136 – Relative to Accessory Dwelling Units Dear Mr. Chair and Members of the Housing Committee, I write in strong opposition to HB 1136, a bill that, while well-intentioned, represents a significant overreach into local land-use authority and a fundamentally flawed approach to housing policy in New Hampshire. Accessory dwelling units can be a useful housing tool when implemented thoughtfully and locally. HB 1136, however, advances a one-size-fits-all mandate that ignores the practical, fiscal, and infrastructure realities facing New Hampshire’s diverse cities and towns. Housing policy that overrides local planning judgment does not produce better housing outcomes—it produces conflict, inefficiency, and unintended consequences. First, HB 1136 erodes local control, a principle that has long defined effective land-use governance in this state. Municipalities are best positioned to evaluate whether, where, and under what conditions ADUs are appropriate, based on lot size, density, water and septic capacity, road access, fire protection, and neighborhood context. This bill substitutes legislative mandate for local expertise, forcing approvals even where communities lack the infrastructure or administrative capacity to support them. Second, HB 1136 creates real fiscal and operational burdens for municipalities. ADUs are not cost-free. They increase demand on local services—roads, emergency response, schools, and code enforcement—often without generating sufficient revenue to offset those costs. By restricting local discretion, the bill effectively imposes unfunded mandates on communities already under financial strain. Third, the bill introduces administrative and legal ambiguity. By compelling expanded ADU allowances while existing zoning, health, safety, and building regulations remain in place, HB 1136 risks placing local boards in legally precarious positions. This is a recipe for increased appeals, litigation, and inconsistent enforcement—none of which advance housing production. Fourth, HB 1136 fails to ensure affordability or long-term housing benefit. There is no meaningful mechanism to prevent ADUs created under this bill from becoming short-term rentals, speculative investments, or luxury units. Without strong local regulatory authority, the bill does little to address workforce housing needs while potentially exacerbating neighborhood instability. Finally, HB 1136 reflects a troubling pattern of attempting to solve complex housing challenges through blunt statutory overrides. New Hampshire does not lack housing because municipalities are hostile to ADUs. We lack housing because of infrastructure constraints, financing gaps, workforce shortages, and years of underinvestment. This bill addresses none of those root causes. Housing policy works best when the state partners with municipalities, providing tools, flexibility, and resources—not mandates that strip communities of their ability to plan responsibly. For these reasons, I urge the committee to recommend HB 1136 as Inexpedient to Legislate. New Hampshire can and should support housing production, but not at the expense of local governance, fiscal responsibility, and sound planning. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, David Preece State Representative, Hillsborough 17

This was felt to be a good idea last year and there is no reason to change at this point