Senate Executive Departments and Administration Committee
Ben Mickens 271-1403
CACR 13, relating to registers of probate.
Providing that the office of register of probate and all references to such office be eliminated.
Hearing Date: March 18, 2026
Time Opened: 10:10 a.m. Time Closed: 10:15 a.m.
Members of the Committee Present: Senators Pearl, McGough and Reardon
Members of the Committee Absent : Senators Gannon and Altschiller
Bill Analysis: This constitutional amendment concurrent resolution amends the constitution to delete the position of register of probate and all references to the position of register of probate.
Sponsors:
Rep. D. Mannion | Rep. Rombeau | Rep. Ankarberg |
Rep. Tenczar | Rep. Kuttab | Rep. Donnelly |
Sen. Rosenwald |
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
Who supports the bill: Senator Daryl Abbas, Senator Cindy Rosenwald, Liz Tentarelli, Bonnie Hill, Eric Pauer, Barbara Bryce, Brad Louth, and Pamela Harders.
Who opposes the bill: No one.
Who is neutral on the bill: No one.
Summary of testimony presented in support:
Senator Daryl Abbas
- Senator Abbas introduced CACR 13 on behalf of Representative Mannion
- Senator Abbas explained that this question has been on the ballot before and the position had no functions or responsibility outside of its inclusion in the New Hampshire Constitution.
- He added that the position has an annual salary.
Former Speaker of the House Donna Sytek
- Former Speaker Sytek explained that historically the Register of Probate has served supporting the Probate Court judge with the handling of estates, guardianships, adoptions, and professional staff.
- Former Speaker Sytek stated that in 2011 a comprehensive reorganization of the district and probate courts, removing the responsibilities of the Register of Probate.
- She added that the only thing that remains of the Register is the title which is enshrined in the New Hampshire Constitution.
- Former Speaker Sytek stated that this question made the ballot in 2022 but did not meet the necessary 2/3rd vote to accept the constitutional amendment.
- Former Speaker Sytek explained that in the past the question has been somewhat misleading and could be the reason the amendment has not yet passed. She added that this CACR would amend that question to more clearly reflect the change it would impose.
Summary of testimony presented in opposition: None.
Neutral Information Presented: None.
BM
Date Hearing Report completed: March 20, 2026