Prohibiting, with limited exceptions, state agencies from requiring use of proprietary software in interactions with the public.
The anticipated fiscal impact of HB617 is significant, with an estimated cost of compliance projected to be around $1.47 billion over a five-year period. This includes expenses for reimplementing approximately 271 publicly facing applications managed by the state's Department of Information Technology (DoIT). The complexity of existing systems means a substantial portion of these applications would need to be either replaced with open-source alternatives or developed anew, which raises concerns about the feasibility and effectiveness of the transition.
House Bill 617 (HB617) introduces a mandate prohibiting state agencies in New Hampshire from requiring the use of proprietary software for public interactions, offering limited exceptions. This bill aims to enhance accessibility and compliance by promoting the use of open source software, potentially streamlining government processes. Important interactions covered by this legislation include the filing of taxes, court proceedings, and the processing of unemployment benefits, among others. The bill is seen as a push towards modernizing the way citizens engage with government services and increasing flexibility in software use.
Discussions around the bill have illustrated a divide among lawmakers and stakeholders. Supporters argue that transitioning to open-source software will reduce costs in the long run and improve public accessibility. Conversely, critics are concerned that the short-term fiscal burdens and the potential for operational disruptions may outweigh the anticipated benefits. There are apprehensions regarding the capacity of the state to effectively manage such a large-scale transition, given past experiences with software implementation.
The most notable contention surrounding HB617 centers on its feasibility and the potential logistical challenges it presents. With a historical precedent of software implementation costs being three to seven times the original software licenses, many question whether the state can effectively manage the switch to open-source systems while ensuring continuity in public services. The bill’s limited exceptions for proprietary software use are yet to be clearly defined, which adds to the uncertainty regarding how it will operate in practice, particularly in complex cases where proprietary solutions may be the only viable option.