Chairman Odell and Honorable Members of the Ways and Means Committee, I am Tricia Lucas, Policy Director at New Futures.  New Futures is a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization working to reduce underage alcohol problems and to increase access to substance abuse treatment.  I appear before you today in support of SB 146 which relates to funding for the Alcohol Abuse Prevention and Treatment Fund (the “Alcohol Fund”).  SB 146 amends the section of RSA 176:16 that specifies the percentage of gross profits from the State’s sale of liquor and other revenues that is to be deposited in the Alcohol Fund.  SB 146 makes two changes to RSA 176:16, II:

• SB 146 simplifies the funding formula, which is unnecessarily complex.
• SB 146 reduces the percentage of gross profits to be deposited into the Alcohol Fund from 5% to 3.5%.

New Futures’ support of SB 146 may, at first glance, appear inconsistent with our history of forceful advocacy for increased resources to support alcohol and other drug prevention and treatment services. We welcome the opportunity to share the reasons for our support with the Committee.

By way of background, the Alcohol Fund was created by SB 153 in 2000 as a nonlapsing fund to support alcohol education and abuse prevention and treatment services.  The creation of the Alcohol Fund reflects the strongly held belief that if the State is going to sell and directly profit from the sale of alcohol, it has a responsibility to dedicate a portion of the profits of sale to address the well – documented harm that results from substance abuse and addiction.  The authority to distribute moneys from the Alcohol Fund is assigned by statute to the Governor’s Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Intervention, and Treatment (the “Governor’s Commission” or “Commision”) for alcohol and other drug prevention, intervention, and treatment and other purposes related to the duties of the Commission.  As conceived by SB 153, a portion of the gross profits from the sale of liquor was to be directly deposited into the Alcohol Fund and from there, distributed by the Governor’s Commission in a manner consistent with its statutory authority.

During the last three biennia, the Alcohol Fund has not functioned as intended – in each of the last three budget cycles, the operation of the Alcohol Fund has been suspended in HB 2, thus eliminating the direct link between the profits from the sale of liquor to the funding for prevention and treatment.  Instead, in each of the last three biennial budgets, the Governor’s Commission received general fund appropriations through the DHHS budget that were significantly less that  the amount required by the funding formula in RSA 176: 16, II.  The application of the statutory funding formula would have resulted in annual deposits to the Alcohol Fund of between $5M and $6M.

In the SFY 2008/2009 Budget:

• The Governor’s Commission appropriation for SFY 2008 was $4,074,793, which was reduced by Executive Orders to $3,472,149.
• The Governor’s Commission appropriation for SFY 2009 was $5,600,000 which was reduced by Executive Order to $4, 078,000.

Even with the 27% reduction in funding in SFY 2009, the Governor’s Commission supported, in whole or in part, 37 community – based prevention, intervention, and treatment programs located throughout the state.

New Futures’ support for SB 146 is based on:

• New Futures’ commitment to restoring the integrity of the Alcohol Fund by reestablishing the critical link between the State’s sale of alcohol and its responsibility to address the harm that results from alcohol abuse and addiction and by and ensuring that the funding formula, which embodies this link, is not suspended as part of the budget process.
• New Futures commitment to the protection of a stable and predictable funding source for prevention programs and treatment services that is necessary for the Governor’s Commission to move forward with its strategic work to implement the Alcohol and Other Drug Plan for the State – Overcoming the Impact of Alcohol and Other Drug Problems (April 2007).

In addition, we recognize that in the State’s current economic situation, it is critical that the funding formula for the Alcohol Fund be consistent with the budget reality and the Governor’s budget instructions.  We believe that the SB 146 reduction in the percentage of profits from 5% to 3.5% is responsive both to the State’s budget challenges and to the needs of our communities and citizens for adequate prevention programs and treatment services.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today.  Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or need additional information.