Does the bill accuse anyone of wrongdoing?

No.

HB 1675 authorizes an investigation and audit process.
Any conclusions would come from the commission’s formal findings, not from the bill itself.

IS THE BILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL ?

No.

Critics claim the bill is an unconstitutional “bill of attainder”, which is a legislative attempt to prosecute and criminally punish an individual.

The bill does not prosecute or charge anyone or even make allegations…it simply asks for information that the public is entitled to as funders of the organization. Oversight of government spending by departments is a core responsibility of the Legislative Branch.

The bill does not punish the Coalition. The elements of the original bill (which have now been removed, anyway) that critics say is punishment are 1) restricting funding to only material benefits for survivors, and 2) removal of membership on statutory commissions…both of which are purely at the discretion of the legislative branch.

It is no more unfair to qualify funding or change membership, than it was when the legislature awarded the funding, and added the membership.

WAS THIS PUT IN BY CRAZY, ANGRY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS?

When individuals publicly question powerful institutions, institutions often target the credibility of the questioner, rather than the substance of the question.

Approximately six years ago, journalist and filmmaker Claire Best began asking questions about discrepancies in a case that the Coalition was publicly highlighting. Claire, a UK-based journalist and award-winning filmmaker in the United States, had personal interest in the matter because her husband was an alumnus of the school involved, and she had considered enrolling her children there.

When details in the public record did not align, Claire pursued information through lawful means. She filed right-to-know requests, submitted written inquiries to public agencies, and published opinion pieces requesting clarification. After it became clear that her questions were unwelcome, she did not contact Coalition employees.

Despite pursuing information through standard journalistic channels, she has characterized by some associated with the Coalition as a “crazy conspiracy theorist.”

Years later, Gracie Gato publicly sought help while fleeing domestic violence in New Hampshire. She posted publicly, tagging WMUR and other public entities, asking for assistance. Adam Sexton, Political Director of WMUR, saw the post and referred her to his wife, Amanda Grady Sexton, who serves as Public Affairs Director for the Coalition.

After reviewing Gracie’s public social media, including her connection to Claire Best, Amanda Grady Sexton informed Gracie that assistance would be contingent upon severing ties with Claire. Gracie declined.

Following that refusal, she, too, was publicly dismissed in similar terms.

[Stacey Brown]

But not Claire Best, nor Gracie Gato, nor Stacey Brown, conceived, drafted, introduced, or submitted the whistleblower legislation now under consideration.

THAT would be NH State Representative Ellen Read:

Ellen Read has been in office for 10 years...she founded the Progressive Caucus in 2017, is a proud Democratic Socialist, and is the long-time champion of measures like Ranked Choice Voting and Campaign Finance Reform, Rent Stabilization/Control, ADU rights expansion, Animal Welfare, and right to sterilization. She recently became the first American politician to set sail on a humanitarian flotilla to break the illegal blockade of Gaza.

She is the State Director for the National Foundation of Women Legislators, and the State Lead for the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, and successfully got her town to adopt a 100% renewable energy commitment.

In 2022, after six years in office, Ellen was sexually assaulted and was denied a rape kit by a hospital doctor who was ignorant of the law.  She called the hotlines repeatedly for advice or resources, but was offered nothing useful.  Being a good Democrat believing that the Coalition were the good guys, and wanting to make sure no other victim went through the denial of a kit, she sought the Coalition's help in crafting a bill that would require hospitals to inform those asserting to be sexual assault victims of their existing legal rights (including to a kit)--much as they inform patients of the patients bill of rights.  

The Coalition refused to help, and lobbied hard against the bill, stating (hyperlink cued video) that assault victims who have been drugged, controlled, and groped but escape being penetrated by their rapist should NOT have a right to an evidence kit.  Then, seemingly out of vindictiveness, the Coalition also opposed Ellen's bill to allow domestic violence victims out of their lease, and told housing advocates to not support the bill, which was confirmed by the Rights and Democracy housing advocate when he gave his explanation for changing his position on the bill. (When Ellen got the bill out of the House and into the Senate anyway, despite the Coalition opposition, they changed their stance on the bill and were lauded as the champions of the bill). They also seemed to have their hand getting OBGYN advocates to withdraw their support from Ellen's right to sterilization bill (she has since gotten this signed into law as well).

This shocked and confused Ellen...not because she was experiencing opposition (in fact, she is quite used to regular opponents, being a champion for many bold leftist ideas), but because of WHO was opposing her, and how.  Ellen then began asking other legislators for their experience with the Coalition, and learned that opposing pro-survivor bills seemed to be a pattern for them.  It was the equivalent of seeing Planned Parenthood fight every pro-choice bill.  They opposed bills from allowing victims to file protective orders online, to regulating massage parlors to prevent trafficking, to restricting registered sex offenders from living near children's areas...yet even while they fought to prevent certain victims from accessing kits, they actively fought to make NH the first state to ban those same victims from purchasing their own private kit.  It just didn't make sense.

And since they say "follow the money", Ellen decided to connect with people who had been doing exactly that to get more information.  

After learning more over the next couple years about how the money connected to these weird, anti-survivor lobbying positions the Coalition kept taking, Ellen had the idea for HB 1675, wrote it, and submitted it.  

Since then she has connected with dozens of victims, legislators, former Coalition employees, lawyers, and police officers who have had similar experiences with the Coalition...the consistent concern raised by nearly all of them in going public has been "fear of retaliation".

The Coalition can call one British journalist a crazy conspiracy theorist, and then maybe they add on one podcaster victim.  Maybe even add a City Councillor. But how many people will they keep calling crazy before it just doesn't make sense anymore?  How many legislators who are just trying to help victims...how many victims who have been denied...how many shelter workers who have personally seen how the umbrella organization prioritizes money over survivors? How is it possible that everyone is crazy, except them?

Or is it more likely that they simply resort to that age-old tactic of smearing and discrediting their critics?

After all, throughout the entire four hour hearing, and all of their social media posts and opeds…they have not substantively addressed one single issue brought forward by the bill, nor explained any of the evidence.

HB1675 is about documented financial filings, audit findings, and structural oversight concerns — not personal disputes.

The focus of this effort is transparency, reconciliation of public documents, and legislative accountability.