Stakeholders split over whether nonprofit vaccine association should post recorded meetings
Loading...
Summary
House Bill 233 would require the New Hampshire Vaccine Association to record meetings on audio/video and publish them on its website; the association said it already publishes materials and that adding recordings or subjecting it to RSA 91‑A would add cost and legal complexity.
Representative Joshua Conkwa introduced House Bill 233, a short bill that would require audio and video recordings of New Hampshire Vaccine Association meetings to be posted on the association’s website. The sponsor told senators the sessions are already conducted over Zoom and that posting the recordings would make proceedings available to members of the public who cannot attend live.
Patrick Miller, executive director of the association, told the committee the association already posts agendas, minutes, budgets and other documents and allows public attendance; he said the group is a private 501(c)(3) nonprofit that was established under statute (cited in testimony as RSA 126‑Q) and reimbursed by participating payers, not by state funds. Miller opposed subjecting the association to full RSA 91‑A coverage and said doing so would impose new administrative costs (he estimated additional costs for AV, staff and security) that the association currently does not bear and that are ultimately paid by participating insurers.
Former board member and current public critic Laura Condon and others urged the committee to require recordings and wider disclosure, saying DHHS and the association manage a multi‑million‑dollar vaccine procurement program and that the public has an interest in recordings of deliberations. Condon said the association had previously recorded meetings and provided recordings on request, but that it stopped recording after a requester used a Right‑to‑Know request to obtain recordings; she argued restoring posted recordings should be a minimum expectation for an entity that functions with government appointees on its board.
Representative Steve Pearson, who appeared as a House EDNA member, said the House committee that previously heard the bill concluded the association should be more transparent and that posting recordings reflects present expectations for public-facing bodies. Senators asked whether the bill would create unintended precedents for other nonprofits and whether the association could voluntarily restore posted recordings. Association representatives said they could consider posting recordings but wanted clarity that the bill would not broaden 91‑A obligations for nonprofits that are not governmental bodies.
Ending: The committee closed testimony, asking staff to clarify the legal status of the association, the auditor’s previous IRS filing that treated the association as a government affiliate for Form 990 purposes, and the fiscal consequences of posting recordings or applying 91‑A obligations. No committee vote was recorded at the hearing.
