Judiciary Committee narrows remote public-record requests, advances several right-to-know bills

The House Judiciary Committee spent a large portion of its executive session on a package of bills that would change how members of the public request and access government records.

Representative Alexander led debate on House Bill 66, which would change the phrase “citizen” to “person” in the state’s right-to-know statutes and explicitly allow remote requests for records and electronic delivery in many cases. To limit remote requests from people with no tie to New Hampshire, the committee adopted amendment 2025-0110h. Under that amendment, a person who requests remote delivery must demonstrate a New Hampshire connection — for example, domicile, property ownership, New Hampshire tax status, a New Hampshire place of business, or registration to do business in New Hampshire — unless the requester is a member of the news media (as defined in RSA 91-A).

Representative Alexander explained the amendment’s contours: if a remote requester lacks the New Hampshire nexus they must instead inspect or collect records in person. He said the change would curb “pajama‑clad” mass requests from out of state while allowing local and media requests to be produced electronically.

The committee adopted the nexus amendment by a show of hands and later approved HB 66 as amended on a roll call. The amendment vote was 13 to 4; the final committee recommendation on HB 66 as amended was 13 yeas and 4 nays. Chairman Lynn said the amended bill would go to the regular calendar.

The panel also took related action on other open-government measures and privacy items:

- House Bill 74, a companion measure addressing the statutory meaning of “citizen,” was retained by the committee for further work (vote: 17 yeas, 0 nays).

- House Bill 111 (FN) would extend the right-to-know ombudsman position for two years. Representative Catawba moved passage with amendment 2025-0170h; the committee adopted the amendment and later voted to recommend passage (OTPA) of HB 111 with the amendment. The final committee tally on OTPA was 15 yeas and 2 nays; the bill will go to the Finance Committee because the extension has budget implications.

- House Bill 114 would roll back parts of the recent statutory changes governing fees for public-records requests; the committee voted ITL (inexpedient to legislate) on HB 114 (13 yeas, 4 nays), effectively killing it at this stage.

- House Bill 376 clarifies that library user information — including library card records and membership status — is exempt from public disclosure. Supporters argued the change protects patron privacy; the committee recommended passage (OTP) by 16 yeas and 1 nay and placed the bill on the consent calendar.

- House Bill 273 would permit parents to access records of their minor child’s library account when the parent’s license or mailing address matches the child’s. After debate about privacy and special circumstances (foster care, custody orders), the committee recommended passage on a narrow vote, 9 yeas to 8 nays; authors will prepare the committee report.

- House Bill 265 (technical change requiring start/end times and the name of the person taking minutes) passed on a unanimous vote and was placed on consent (17 yeas, 0 nays).

Committee members debated the balance between openness and limits on burdensome, out‑of‑state requests. Representative McFarland urged protections for local government staffing and emphasized that the amendment provides a modest deterrent against mass remote requests; Representative Alexander said the amendment may be unnecessary because determined out‑of‑state requesters can find workarounds, but he supported the committee’s choice to adopt the amendment. Several members suggested a working group to refine language in both HB 66 and HB 74.

Many of the bills will move to other committees for fiscal review or will be scheduled for floor consideration; authors were asked to submit committee reports with any amendment text to the chair by the end of the day.

Votes at a glance: HB 66 (as amended by 2025-0110h) — amendment adopted 13–4; OTPA as amended 13–4; HB 74 retained — 17–0; HB 111 (with amendment 2025-0170h) — OTPA 15–2; HB 114 — ITL 13–4; HB 376 — OTP 16–1; HB 273 — OTP 9–8; HB 265 — OTP 17–0.

Representative Alexander and other lawmakers framed the package as an effort to modernize access while protecting municipal staff from excessive out‑of‑state electronic requests.