Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hospitality Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to remove century‑old hotel register and rate‑posting mandates
Summary
A Commerce Committee hearing examined Senate Bill 19, which would repeal an old requirement that hotels keep physical guest registers and post rate schedules in rooms or on signs. Supporters said the rules are obsolete in an era of digital booking; lawmakers pressed for clarity about which record-keeping duties would remain.
Senate Bill 19 to repeal long‑standing hotel registration and rate‑posting rules drew questions Tuesday at the New Hampshire Senate Commerce and Consumer Affairs Committee hearing.
Grant Bossi, deputy chief of staff for the New Hampshire Senate, introduced the measure on behalf of the bill’s prime sponsor, saying, “Two years ago, this legislature passed Senate Bill 245 to remove the antiquated requirement that New Hampshire hotels maintain a physical book or card system with the names of all their guests for public inspection.”
Supporters told the committee the provision is a holdover from the analog era. Mike Summers, president and CEO of the New Hampshire Lodging and Restaurant Association, said the industry wants the law updated to match current practice. “We really made kinda three changes,” Summers said, adding that the booking‑card requirement was already updated last year and the current bill cleans up remaining statutory cross‑references and removes provisions that require posting minimum/maximum rates on interior placards or exterior signs.
Committee members pressed witnesses on what would remain on the books. Representative Leon asked whether repeal of an internal cross‑reference to RSA 353:3 would eliminate the state’s existing inspection registry; Bossi and Summers said the intent was to remove only the antiquated “booking card” language while leaving the underlying record‑keeping requirement intact. "I would think that the keeping the register open would still be a requirement," Bossi said, summarizing his reading of the statute.
Lawmakers also questioned the practical effect of the old rate‑posting rules. Representative Burrows noted that hotel pricing now fluctuates minute‑to‑minute on digital platforms; Summers said enforcement is effectively non‑existent and that mandatory posted maximum/minimum rates are “nonsensical” in the current market. Committee members raised whether anyone enforces the posting rule today, who would enforce it if retained, and whether the bill might unintentionally remove useful notice requirements.
The hearing record includes questions about how the bill treats arrival/departure dates and electronic booking systems. Summers and Bossi said the legislation keeps the requirement that hotels record a guest’s agreed departure date but removes the outdated “booking card system” reference so the rule matches modern digital reservation records.
The committee took no formal vote at the hearing. Supporters and committee staff said they will prepare clarifying language and return in a subcommittee to reconcile statutory cross‑references before any final action.
For now, the bill remains in committee; proponents say it modernizes statutes last amended in the 1950s–1970s and reflects how hotels now manage reservations and rates.
