Senate committee debates recusal rules for officials serving on both planning and zoning boards; sponsor asked to draft amendment

Representative Joe Alexander introduced House Bill 92 to the Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs Committee, saying the measure responds to a constituent concern about the same faces deciding a planning-board matter and then hearing the appeal on the zoning board.

“My name is Representative Joe Alexander. I represent the town of Goffstown,” Alexander told the committee, and he said the bill’s intent is to prevent the same individual from deciding a matter on one board and then participating in the appeal on the other. The version before the Senate, Alexander said, reflects small amendments adopted by the House committee to clarify language.

Senators questioned whether the bill’s current language would unintentionally bar members from voting in future proceedings and raised a practical issue for smaller towns: if members recuse themselves, would the board still have a quorum? Committee members repeatedly returned to the point that some communities struggle to recruit volunteers and that a blanket prohibition on serving on both boards could leave boards short-handed.

Lawmakers discussed several drafting options in executive session, including striking lines that would prevent someone who did not participate at the planning-board level from later voting at the planning-board level after a zoning-board override. Several senators suggested narrowing the language to require recusal only when a member actually participated in the prior decision being appealed. The committee placed the bill on hold to allow the sponsor and senators to draft an amendment to address the procedural and quorum concerns.

No formal committee vote was recorded to advance the bill; senators instructed the sponsor to return with revised language at a later date.