This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law | |
|---|---|
| Name | New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law |
| Long title | RSA Chapter 91-A |
| Enacted by | New Hampshire General Court |
| Enacted | 1967 |
| Status | current |
New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law The New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law is a state statute codified as RSA Chapter 91-A that establishes public access to governmental public records and public meetings. It governs interactions among New Hampshire General Court, governor, municipalities, and state agencies while intersecting with federal precedents such as Freedom of Information Act litigation and decisions by the United States Supreme Court. The law has been central to disputes involving New Hampshire Attorney General, local school boards, city councils, and nonprofit watchdogs like American Civil Liberties Union affiliates.
RSA Chapter 91-A was adopted to implement open access policies championed by legislators in the New Hampshire General Court and activists influenced by broader movements including the Freedom of Information Act era reforms. The statute sets standards for access to minutes, recordings, and written materials held by entities such as seacoast municipalities, county commissions, and town clerks. It has been interpreted in rulings by the New Hampshire Supreme Court, referenced in briefs by the New Hampshire Attorney General, and litigated by parties including ACLU of New Hampshire and private journalists from outlets like the Concord Monitor. The law interacts with federal decisions from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and decisions from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire.
The statute defines "public body" to include school districts, county governments, city councils, planning boards, and many quasi-public entities such as commissions created by the New Hampshire General Court. It establishes presumptive openness for records including minutes, correspondence, financial records, and contracts prepared for bodies like Department of Health and Human Services (New Hampshire), Department of Education (New Hampshire), and municipal zoning boards. Provisions address timing for meetings of select boards, notice requirements under RSA provisions, and retention of records by offices like secretaries of state and town clerks. Intersections occur with statutes governing juvenile courts, grand juries, and licensing boards such as the Board of Medicine (New Hampshire) which may have distinct confidentiality rules.
Request procedures under RSA 91-A require requests be directed to custodians such as mayors, city managers, or designated records officers; agencies like the New Hampshire Department of Justice provide guidance. Requests often reference specific documents held by bodies like school boards, planning boards, or county administrations and may involve fee schedules similar to those used by the Library of Congress or municipal archives. When disputes arise, requesters have sought relief in venues including the New Hampshire Superior Court or through complaints to the New Hampshire Attorney General and have relied on reporters from outlets like Union Leader or Nashua Telegraph to publicize denials. The statute contemplates timely responses, copying procedures, and the production of electronic records from systems used by entities including University System of New Hampshire institutions.
RSA 91-A enumerates exemptions and recognizes confidentiality established by other statutes, affecting records from entities such as Department of Health and Human Services (New Hampshire), Department of Safety (New Hampshire), Judicial Branch (New Hampshire), and licensing boards like the Board of Nursing (New Hampshire). Exempt categories include personally identifiable information from criminal records, medical records protected under laws referenced with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, and certain deliberative materials from bodies like Executive Council of New Hampshire. Courts including the New Hampshire Supreme Court have balanced these exemptions against open access principles in cases involving police departments, prosecutors, and school districts.
Enforcement mechanisms involve civil actions in New Hampshire Superior Court and discretionary intervention by the New Hampshire Attorney General. Remedies can include injunctions, declarations, and awards of statutory attorneys' fees; litigants have sought relief under precedents set by cases argued before the New Hampshire Supreme Court and sometimes appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit when federal issues are implicated. Enforcement actions have been brought by journalists from outlets like NHPR and nonprofit organizations such as Society of Professional Journalists chapters, as well as by private citizens represented by firms that litigate access rights in state courts.
The law has produced notable disputes involving Concord (New Hampshire), Manchester, New Hampshire, and Nashua, New Hampshire officials, school boards in districts like Derry, New Hampshire, and state entities including the Department of Safety (New Hampshire). High-profile cases have addressed electronic communications by public officials, executive session minutes of bodies like the Executive Council of New Hampshire, and searches by law enforcement, with rulings from the New Hampshire Supreme Court shaping practice. Controversies have attracted participation from national organizations such as the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and prompted coverage by national outlets including The New York Times when issues overlapped with federal inquiries.
Since its enactment, RSA Chapter 91-A has been amended by sessions of the New Hampshire General Court in response to technological change, judicial interpretation by the New Hampshire Supreme Court, and advocacy by groups including the American Civil Liberties Union and press associations like the New England Newspaper and Press Association. Amendments have clarified electronic records handling, fee structures, and definitions of "public body," and have been sponsored by legislators from districts across Hillsborough County, New Hampshire and Rockingham County, New Hampshire. Legislative debates have referenced precedent from the Freedom of Information Act and comparative statutes in states such as Massachusetts and Maine.
Category:New Hampshire law