Moira Ryan

To: House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee Re: HB 1337 – AN ACT repealing the New Hampshire council on autism spectrum disorders hb1337 Position: Support (Ought to Pass) Chair and Members of the Committee: My name is Moira Ryan, and I am submitting testimony in support of HB 1337, which repeals RSA 171-A:32 (the New Hampshire Council on Autism Spectrum Disorders) and related statutory references. hb1337 I support repeal for a simple reason: the Council’s structure and practices create too much risk for too little public value. New Hampshire families affected by autism deserve transparent, accountable, and effective work—not another layer of government activity that can operate without meaningful oversight. 1) If a body uses public authority/resources, it must comply with public accountability RSA 171-A:32 establishes the Council to provide leadership and coordination for education, healthcare, and services. But in practice, families experience a body that is too easy to run like a private club—especially when it comes to: Public access: Meetings held in locations or formats that are not meaningfully accessible to the public. (A public council should not function like an invite-only stakeholder group.) Right-to-Know compliance: Under New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know principles, minutes are expected to be made available promptly (commonly within five business days) and meetings must be noticed and conducted in a way the public can attend/observe. Remote-meeting claims: RSA 91-A includes specific requirements for remote participation (identifying remote participants, roll call votes, etc.). If a council is meeting “100% remote,” it should be able to clearly point to the statute and the compliance steps being used. When a council repeatedly fails the basics—access, minutes, responsiveness—it undermines public trust and harms the very families it claims to serve. 2) The Council’s outputs do not justify its continued existence HB 1337 specifically removes the requirement that DMV consult the Council for the Blue Envelope Program design. hb1337 The Blue Envelope Program itself is already established in RSA 265:3-c and can be administered by DMV without a standing council. If one of the Council’s most visible “wins” is limited to design input on a program another agency can run, that is not a win. hb1337 an ongoing council with ongoing costs. 3) Representation and scope problems: families outside the “most severe” are left out Autism is a spectrum. Many individuals and families fall outside the narrow “most severe disability” frame yet still face urgent needs: school disputes, service navigation gaps, transition-to-adulthood planning, workforce barriers, housing, transportation, co-occurring conditions, and caregiver stability. When a council’s agenda consistently centers a subset of the spectrum while ignoring the broader population, it becomes unrepresentative by design—and families conclude (correctly) that the council is not for them. 4) Appointment and conflict-of-interest concerns warrant repeal, not patchwork fixes A legitimate public council needs clear appointment pathways, transparency about membership, and safeguards against capture by professional advocates or organizations that lobby for funding or policy outcomes. RSA 171-A:32 contemplates a formal public membership structure. If a council drifts into self-appointment or informal gatekeeping—or tolerates persistent conflicts of interest—it cannot credibly claim to speak for New Hampshire families. Marissa Berg NIS and has ties to the Area Agency. Sarah A. was also on the committee and she is married to Alex, a formal lobbyist and Sarah is on the Quality Council. ABLE, a notorious lobbying group is also on the Autism Committee. Those are just some examples. This is not a problem you fix with “best practices.” It’s a problem you fix by ending the structure and reassigning any truly necessary tasks to agencies that already have public accountability. 5) Better alternative: move essential functions into accountable agencies If the legislature believes certain coordination functions are still needed after repeal, they should be placed where the public can demand results: DHHS (service navigation, Medicaid/waiver alignment, adult services coordination) DOE (school-age supports and compliance coordination) DMV (Blue Envelope implementation) And any future advisory group should be time-limited, with: a defined charter and deliverables, mandatory public reporting, strict Right-to-Know compliance, and an appointment process that prevents capture. Conclusion HB 1337 is the right step. The Council, as structured and experienced by families, is a low-accountability body with limited deliverables. Repeal will protect public trust and allow New Hampshire to rebuild autism-related coordination in a way that is transparent, representative, and measurably effective. For these reasons, I respectfully request the Committee vote Ought to Pass on HB 1337. hb1337 Respectfully submitted, Moira Ryan