No one is surprised by the flooding in Hampton anymore. On the wrong morning, the row of houses along some sections appears like a row of cabins anchored in a slow river, and streets that used to dry out by lunchtime now remain glassy for hours. Locals discuss it in the same way that others discuss traffic. It’s simply the current situation.
Senate Bill 562 is intriguing in part because of this tacit acceptance. The bill, which was unanimously approved by the House Committee on Commerce and Consumer Affairs, would establish the Granite State Home Mitigation and Resiliency Program, which would provide grants of up to $9,500 to homeowners who would strengthen a roof, remove a leaning tree, or take other steps to make their property more resilient to weather that wasn’t previously common. The reasoning is fairly simple. Fewer claims result from tougher homes. Lower premiums eventually result from fewer claims. Commissioner D.J. Bettencourt of the Insurance Department has been patiently presenting that argument for months.
This type of policymaking is unique in that it involves first passing a program and then looking for funding. According to Bettencourt, in order to close the gap, the department intends to approach national philanthropic organizations and nonprofits with a focus on climate change. Until then, the program remains inactive but technically active on the books. As this develops, it’s difficult not to question whether a program based on anticipated generosity can accomplish the same tasks as one based on appropriations.
To be fair, New Hampshire isn’t the worst state in the union for home insurance. At the hearing on April 16, Bettencourt himself acknowledged this, describing it as a great place to compare with other states while also stating—almost in the same sentence—that affordability is still a major problem for individual homeowners. Coverage is necessary for mortgages. Premiums are necessary for coverage. Additionally, premiums are becoming more and more dependent on a region’s risk profile, which no longer behaves as the actuarial tables once predicted.
Some states have already made the move. After years of hurricane damage along the Gulf, Alabama established the model in 2011 with its Strengthen Alabama Homes Act. Maine is getting ready to introduce its own version this summer, providing up to $15,000 for roof fortification in specific counties. Interestingly, the state of Maine provided funding for the project. Last year, New Hampshire attempted the same thing but encountered opposition. The concept was put on hold. It came back this year, thinner, voluntary, and courteously awaiting a donor.
Talking around the periphery of this debate, there’s a feeling that lawmakers want to take credit for their efforts without having to deal with the discomfort of writing the check. The issue is not specific to New Hampshire. It’s a national custom. Climate adaptation often occupies this difficult space: it is too costly to embrace, too urgent to ignore, and too politically complex to fund effectively. Programs like SB 562 are the outcome: well-thought-out, modestly ambitious, structurally sound, and entirely reliant on someone else bringing cash.
The question is whether or not that person shows up. In recent years, philanthropic interest in climate resilience has increased, especially among Northeastern-focused foundations. However, charitable funding is often erratic, project-specific, and hesitant to replace what it perceives as a governmental obligation. When a program’s lifeline is a grant cycle, it may not be able to withstand political cycles.
The bill is still in existence, though. There was a unanimous vote. Additionally, even a dormant program is a kind of signal for the homeowners in Hampton and the inland towns that have begun to notice their own water marks creeping higher. There might be assistance on the way. Eventually. Maybe. if the check is being written by someone.
