Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civil Rights Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Audit finds backlog and delays at Human Rights Commission; lawmakers weigh options
Summary
A fiscal audit flagged staffing shortfalls, slow processing and unresolved cases at the New Hampshire Human Rights Commission; lawmakers discussed options including moving functions, re-staffing, or channeling complaints to court or federal agencies.
A recent fiscal-audit review of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights (HRC) prompted legislators to question whether the agency can meet statutory timelines for complaints and whether the state should change where discrimination claims are heard.
Audit materials discussed by the committee showed the commission had roughly 259 pending cases at one point and that some matters exceeded the three-year statute-of-limitations threshold, which in some instances precluded later court actions. "Twenty percent of their cases went beyond the three-year statute of limitations, which precluded those petitioners from going to court," a lawmaker summarized from the audit.
Katrina Taylor, acting assistant director (temporarily in the role), said the commission's backlog predates her tenure and that caseloads have climbed more than 60% in five years. She said five full-time vacancies and one part-time vacancy existed at the time of the audit and that the commission has already begun internal changes, such as updating training and rules, to address audit recommendations.
Lawmakers discussed three policy options: (1) eliminate the administrative HRC process and require claimants to file in superior court directly; (2) transfer the HRC function to another agency such as the Department of Labor; or (3) adopt operational changes and properly staff the commission. Several members noted the trade-off if the HRC were removed: superior-court dockets would likely see more filings, shifting the administrative burden to the judiciary.
Ending: The committee asked staff to gather additional information, including a corrective-action plan from HRC management, vacancy histories, and the fiscal implications of moving functions or expanding staffing.
