All bills

HB 1067-FN

relative to the mental health courts.

Filed 2026 · Died on the table · Judiciary · Courts and Procedure

Official record at gencourt.state.nh.us ↗

Open this bill in the searchable view →  ·  Follow this bill by RSS

On the record

Quoted from the General Court bill status page, not worked out from the docket.

StatusHOUSE
In the HouseDIED ON THE TABLE
Introduced1/7/2026
Floor date2/12/2026
LSR number2322
Local government impactno
Committee codeH10

Bill text (PDF) ↗

Where it stands

House: DIED ON THE TABLE

Every floor vote on this bill was a voice or division vote, so there is no record of how individual legislators voted.

The bill was set aside during the session and never taken back up, so it died when the session ended.

Sponsors

Pearson, Mark(R) Rock 34, Berch, Paul(D) Ches 6, DeSimone, Debra(R) Rock 18, Gannon, Bill(R) Rock 23, Lynn, Bob(R) Rock 17, Mannion, Dennis(R) Rock 25, Scherr, Buzz(D) Rock 26, Weber, Lucy(D) Ches 5
Prime sponsor in bold. From the General Court sponsor file.

What happened

Every action recorded in the official docket, in order. Each line ends with the journal or calendar that recorded it; where we have the document, that citation links to it.

Votes

Roll call tallies and individual votes from the General Court roll call files. Presiding, excused and absent are shown separately: one member presides over each House roll call and does not vote except to break a tie.

Lay HB1067 on Table (Rep. Alexander Jr.)

February 12, 2026 · House · 182–171, adopted

Decided on a division vote. Only the outcome was recorded — there is no count of how any member voted.

Remove from Table (Rep. Newell)

March 11, 2026 · House · 145–179, failed

Decided on a division vote. Only the outcome was recorded — there is no count of how any member voted.

Committee reports

Reproduced from the House Calendar in the committee’s own words.

Majority — INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE

Rep. Joe Alexander

The majority of the Judiciary Committee believes this bill has noble goals but implementation would be unwise. The bill would establish 11 county-based mental health court locations (two in Hillsborough County) whose goal would be to reduce “the costs of incarceration, by reducing the frequency of involuntary emergency admissions and by lowering recidivism and reducing the long-term costs by providing alternative interventions to incarceration by improving treatment and prevention options for those living with mental illness...” These goals sound great however there are a number of issues. First, testimony and questions indicated that there are a number of crimes that would qualify for mental health courts including violent crimes, sexual assault, and violent crimes that include drug possession. The majority has concerns that violent convicted criminals could qualify for expedited release from incarceration or in some cases no jail time. The “risk assessments” done by the Office of Statewide Treatment Courts are not entirely clear and are prone to mistakes. We have seen nationwide what happens when violent convicted criminals with mental disabilities are allowed to roam our streets unchecked. On top of these serious concerns is the fiscal note. Establishing these courts will bloat the government by numerous positions and cost the NH taxpayers $2.7 million in fiscal year 2027 and $4 million in every subsequent year. Vote 10-8.

Minority — OUGHT TO PASS

Rep. Paul Berch

The minority of the Judiciary Committee believes that establishing a statewide mental health court system is both compassionate and cost-effective. This bipartisan bill reflects collaboration among corrections, the court system, and mental health and social service providers, and is informed by a prior study commission. While mental health courts require up front investment, they reduce long-term costs by substituting effective treatment, supervision, and accountability for the high and recurring expense of incarceration. In human terms, they help people whose lives have been derailed by mental illness and substance use disorders stabilize and become productive members of society rather than cycling through jails and hospitals. Testimony from providers and organizations working with New Hampshire’s existing mental health courts confirms these programs are effective and cost-saving, much like our widely acclaimed drug courts. By addressing the root causes of criminal behavior through treatment and case management, mental health courts reduce recidivism, improve public safety, and ultimately produce better outcomes at lower overall cost than traditional criminal processing.

Hearings and recordings

Recordings are the General Court’s own, on YouTube. Start times are estimates unless stated otherwise, and the player opens early.

Page generated 2026-09-03 from data published by the New Hampshire General Court. Granite Record is an independent project, not affiliated with the General Court. The official record always takes precedence. Corrections: [email protected]