A proposal that would allow municipalities to charge more money for more time-intensive public records requests narrowly passed the New Hampshire House on Thursday. It now heads to the Senate.
The bill would allow cities, towns and other public bodies to charge $25 per hour for records requests that take more than 10 hours to fulfill.
The 193-179 vote divided both Republican and Democratic caucuses.
Some city and town officials who support the measure say fulfilling records requests is taking up too much time and resources. The bill also has the backing of the New Hampshire Attorney General’s office, which advises state agencies on right-to-know issues and fields information requests itself.
At an earlier hearing, a lawyer with the Attorney General’s office characterized it as a “reasonable” way to deter “vexatious requests that are only meant to burden or impede governmental business.”
But the proposal has also drawn opposition from a coalition that crosses ideological lines: the New Hampshire chapters of the ACLU and Americans for Prosperity, as well as the New Hampshire Press Association, of which NHPR is a member.
During the floor debate Thursday, the bill’s supporters were adamant the change strikes a balance that would allow most public records requests to remain inexpensive, while deterring overly broad ones, including those made in bad faith.
“This requires, in circumstances where there is an extraordinary request, this requires that the person have at least some skin in the game,” said Republican Rep. Bob Lynn of Windham.
But critics argued charging taxpayers for public information runs counter to New Hampshire tradition — and the state constitution, which requires government to “be open, accessible, accountable and responsive.”
“The right-to-know is an incredible tool in identifying systemic government abuse: it has exposed police misconduct, how various agencies regulate, how laws are enforced and how we are taxed,” said Rep. Marjorie Smith, a Democrat from Durham. “This bill will give government agencies a significant tool to obstruct providing that vital information from taxpayers.”
