Relative to attorney's fees in actions under the right to know law.
Impact
The passage of HB307 could significantly influence state laws surrounding public access to information and the fiscal responsibilities of public bodies. Currently, the ability to recover attorney's fees is contingent upon the court finding that the public agency knew or should have known about its violations. The bill removes these preconditions, thereby potentially increasing the number of cases where fees might be awarded to requesters. As a result, municipalities and state agencies may face a rise in litigation costs, as they could be obligated to pay attorney’s fees whenever a requester wins a lawsuit regarding their right to access information under RSA 91-A.
Summary
House Bill 307 (HB307) seeks to amend the Right to Know Law in New Hampshire by allowing courts to award attorney's fees to the prevailing party in cases where public bodies or agencies do not comply with requests for information. This bill specifies that such awards would occur only if the court issues a judgment in favor of the requester that is not later reversed. The intent is to enhance accountability around public records and ensure that citizens have more robust avenues to enforce their right to access governmental information.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB307 is mixed. Proponents argue that it strengthens the Right to Know Law and empowers citizens by lowering the financial barrier to legal action when seeking government transparency. They see this as a necessary reform to improve accountability in public offices. Conversely, critics express concern that the bill could lead to an increase in frivolous lawsuits against public agencies, arguing that it may burden municipalities with rising legal costs and discourage proactive compliance with transparency efforts.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the concern that removing the knowledge requirement for awarding fees may result in more lawsuits being filed. Opponents also argue that this could create a chilling effect on local governance, where entities might hesitate to deny requests out of fear of litigation. The New Hampshire Municipal Association and the New Hampshire Association of Counties both voiced concerns that the financial impact on municipalities could be significant, as the bill lacks clear provisions to control excessive legal claims. Thus, while the bill aims to enhance transparency, its implementation raises questions about the balance between facilitating public access and protecting governmental entities from undue legal pressure.
Removing fees and charges for governmental records under the right-to-know law and reinstating potential liability for disclosure of information exempt from disclosure.
Removing fees and charges for governmental records under the right-to-know law and reinstating potential liability for disclosure of information exempt from disclosure.