New Hampshire Senate Bill SB344

New Hampshire 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/15/21
• Refer: 12/15/21
• Refer: 2/10/22
• Refer: 2/16/22
• Refer: 3/9/22
• Engrossed: 4/1/22
• Refer: 4/1/22
• Report DNP: 4/25/22

Caption

Relative to the electronic participation requirements of meetings open to the public under the right to know law.

Impact

If enacted, SB 344 would amend existing state law to clarify the conditions under which electronic participation is permitted, ensuring that remote attendees can be effectively integrated into the decision-making process. The bill outlines that each public body must keep detailed minutes regarding the reasons for remote participation and requires that all members are audible to one another and to the public, thereby preserving the integrity and transparency of public discussions. Additionally, it mandates that public access must be ensured in all electronic formats used during meetings.

Summary

Senate Bill 344 proposes amendments to RSA 91-A concerning the electronic participation requirements for public meetings, effectively allowing members of public bodies to attend meetings remotely when less than a quorum is physically present. This legislation aims to enhance inclusivity and access to public governance by enabling participation from members who cannot be present in person, thereby fostering a broader range of opinions and voices in local governance discussions. Notably, this change could provide opportunities for increased attendance and engagement in public meetings, particularly in circumstances where individuals face logistical challenges.

Conclusion

Overall, SB 344 represents a significant shift towards accommodating modern communication preferences in governmental operations. The discussions and debates surrounding the bill reflect a broader conversation about the evolving nature of public governance and the need to adapt to societal changes in how citizens engage with their representatives.

Contention

There are notable points of contention surrounding SB 344, particularly regarding the balance between accessibility and the potential for reduced accountability in remote formats. Critics may argue that requiring video feeds and maintaining a physical presence in a quorum could serve as barriers that undermine the bill's intent. The requirement for roll call votes in meetings held electronically may also face scrutiny as it may complicate the voting process, especially for large public bodies.