Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right To Know Ombudsman topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Right to Know ombudsman warns office could expire June 30 without legislative action; House language would reattach office and change compensation
Summary
Thomas F. Kerr, New Hampshire’s right to know ombudsman, told the Senate Finance Committee his one‑person office faces statutory expiration on June 30 unless the Legislature renews it and that House Bill 2 would restructure the office and change pay and staffing arrangements.
Thomas F. Kerr, the state Right to Know Ombudsman, told the Senate Finance Committee that his office — staffed only by him — will expire at midnight on June 30 unless the Legislature acts to continue it or pass substitute language to restructure it.
Kerr summarized his first annual report and noted the office provides a lower‑cost alternative to Superior Court for appeals under RSA 91‑A (the state right‑to‑know law). Complaints filed with the ombudsman proceed with a $25 filing fee to his office instead of higher court filing costs. He said the office has processed hundreds of inquiries and formal filings since its creation in 2023.
Why it matters: The office provides a lower‑cost, administrative path for public‑records disputes; its disappearance would return more disputes to the court system as the primary remedy.
What Kerr told the committee
- Sunset and House language: Kerr said House Bill 111, a standalone bill to extend the office, was retained in House Finance while House Bill 1/2 includes alternative language (pages 104–105) proposing to attach the ombudsman to the Public Employee Labor Relations Board (PERLB) along with the Personnel Appeals Board. The House Bill 2 language would change compensation to a stipend plus hourly rates for writing and some work and would abolish the current position number in the budget footnote.
- Operational concerns: Kerr said consolidation could provide needed staff support but raised concerns about transition: if no law continues the office by June 30 the office would expire and a complete restart could be required. He also noted a potential technical issue in House Bill 2 that continues existing rules in effect; he warned that wording could complicate future rulemaking.
- Caseload and impact: Kerr told senators he has had roughly 300 inquiries and over 300 formal matters (his numbers varied as he summarized ongoing counts) and that pre‑hearing conferences often resolve disputes without contested hearings. He said he cannot estimate precise court‑avoidance savings but believes the office reduces filings in Superior Court.
Quotes from the record
- “As I’m fond of saying, I brought my entire agency with me today. That’s because, to date, the office has consisted of just me,” Kerr said.
Next steps and committee considerations
Kerr asked the committee to consider the policy and operational implications of the House language; he also offered to answer questions and to coordinate with PERLB officials if the committee prefers consolidation and shared staffing.
