Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Library Records Parental Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates HB 273 on parental access to minors’ library records; library representatives warn of costs and complexity
Summary
Representative Mike Drago introduced HB 273 to allow parents access to their minor children’s library borrowing records; librarians and trustees said many mechanisms already exist and raised staffing, privacy and operational costs for smaller and non-automated libraries.
House Bill 273, introduced by Representative Mike Drago, would allow a parent to obtain their minor child’s library borrowing record. Drago said parents are often surprised that signing a child up for a library card may remove parental access to borrowing records and described practical problems such as tracking down a lost item when the parent does not know which title was checked out.
Drago told the committee a parent in his district ordered a book on a child’s account and the library refused to disclose the title, citing existing confidentiality rules. He argued parents should be able to review their child’s record to make decisions about age‑appropriate material and to resolve billing or lost‑book issues.
Library trustees and professional librarians opposed or urged caution. DJ Wither, a Windham library trustee and former legislator, said parents already have multiple avenues to obtain records — consent, being co‑owners of accounts, linked family cards, asking a child for a password, or court orders — and that the bill would create direct staff and indirect policy costs, especially for non‑automated libraries that keep physical card catalogs. Nicole Govero, a youth services librarian, said requests for current borrowings occur multiple times a day at some libraries and complying with frequent requests would consume staff time; she also described differences between automated and non‑automated systems.
Denise Van Zanten of the New Hampshire Library Association offered to answer operational questions for the committee. Representative Markel and Representative Litchfield said they supported the bill; questions from senators explored custodial and noncustodial parental rights and how the statute should handle multiple parental addresses.
Committee members discussed possible amendments, including whether parental consent or parental-address matching is the right test for access. No committee vote was recorded at the hearing; witnesses and committee members asked staff to evaluate implementation costs and possible conflicts with other statutes and local library policies.
