New Hampshire House Bill HB308

New Hampshire 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/23
• Refer: 1/9/23
• Report Pass: 2/8/23
• Report DNP: 2/8/23
• Engrossed: 3/7/23
• Refer: 3/7/23
• Report Pass: 5/3/23
• Enrolled: 7/19/23
• Chaptered: 8/9/23
• Passed: 8/9/23

Caption

Relative to a quorum for meetings open to the public to include remote presence.

Impact

If enacted, the bill will alter the current stipulations of RSA 91-A, which governs access to governmental records and public meetings. It will permit state boards to allow participation via remote means whenever physical presence is impractical, with the stipulation that at least one-third of board members must be physically present at the meeting location. This transition fosters more inclusive participation and could set a standard for how public meetings are conducted across various government entities, which in turn could enhance governmental transparency and accountability.

Summary

House Bill 308 is a legislative measure designed to amend the existing quorum requirements for public meetings in New Hampshire, specifically allowing for remote participation by members of certain state boards. This bill recognizes the necessity to adapt governmental operations in the face of challenges that may prevent physical attendance, ensuring that essential decision-making can continue without interruption. The proposed changes aim to modernize the way public meetings are conducted by incorporating technology into government operations, facilitating broader public engagement and accessibility.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 308 appears to be generally favorable, particularly in the context of increasing accessibility for public participation in government affairs. Supporters argue that remote meeting capabilities are vital for accommodating circumstances where attendance is challenged due to travel limitations or public health concerns. Conversely, there is a recognition of concern regarding the implications for engagement when meetings are held remotely, with some skeptics questioning whether remote participation may diminish the quality of discussion and decision-making processes.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the definition of what constitutes 'unreasonably impractical' attendance and how the technology used for remote participation will be implemented. There are concerns about ensuring that the ability of members and the public to effectively participate is not compromised by technical difficulties. Furthermore, provisions for emergencies where immediate action is necessary raise questions about the potential for bypassing traditional meeting protocols, highlighting a need for clear guidelines to maintain integrity in decision-making.