New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law and Open Government Statutes

New Hampshire's Right-to-Know Law, codified at RSA Chapter 91-A, establishes the public's right to access governmental records and attend public meetings. The statute operates alongside a network of complementary open government provisions that define how state and local bodies must handle public records requests, conduct official business, and maintain accountability. Understanding the structure of these laws is essential for journalists, researchers, attorneys, and members of the public seeking to hold government accountable or navigate disclosure disputes.

Definition and scope

RSA 91-A, enacted in 1967 and substantially amended in 1977 and 2008, covers 2 core domains: the right to inspect and copy governmental records and the right to attend public meetings of governmental bodies. The law applies to all "public bodies" as defined by RSA 91-A:1-a, a category that includes the state legislature, state agencies, city and town councils, school boards, planning boards, zoning boards, and any other bodies exercising governmental functions on behalf of the state or a political subdivision.

The statute defines "governmental records" broadly to include all papers, books, documents, maps, photographs, electronic records, and other documentary material regardless of physical form (RSA 91-A:1-a, IV). New Hampshire's definition is notable for explicitly covering e-mails and electronic communications created or received in the course of official business.

For the broader statutory landscape in which RSA 91-A operates, the New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated page provides a reference map of the full code structure.

Scope, coverage, and limitations: RSA 91-A governs New Hampshire state and local governmental bodies only. Federal agencies operating in New Hampshire — including the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire and federal administrative offices — are not covered; those entities fall under the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552. Private entities, nonprofit organizations, and corporations are also not covered by RSA 91-A, even if they receive public funding, unless they have been formally delegated governmental authority. Courts addressing access to judicial records apply a separate framework detailed on the New Hampshire Court Records Access page.

How it works

RSA 91-A operates through two parallel mechanisms: the meetings access framework and the records request framework.

Meetings access (RSA 91-A:2 and 91-A:3):

1. All meetings of public bodies must be open to the public.
2. Notice of a meeting must be posted at least 24 hours in advance (RSA 91-A:2, II).
3. A public body may enter a nonpublic session only for one of the specific reasons enumerated in RSA 91-A:3, II — including personnel matters, legal advice from counsel, and ongoing criminal investigations.
4. Minutes of every nonpublic session must be kept and become public after the body determines that confidentiality is no longer warranted, or automatically within 5 years under RSA 91-A:3, III.

Records access (RSA 91-A:4 and 91-A:5):

1. Any person may submit a written or oral request for governmental records to the public body that holds them.
   2.
2. If the records are immediately available, inspection and copying must be permitted during regular business hours.
3. Fees may be charged for copies, but may not exceed the actual cost of reproduction.
4. If records are denied, the body must cite the specific statutory exemption at RSA 91-A:5 or another applicable law.

The 14 enumerated exemptions under RSA 91-A:5 include personnel files, attorney-client communications, tax returns, and records whose disclosure would constitute an invasion of privacy. The privacy exemption has been the subject of significant New Hampshire Supreme Court litigation, including the court's repeated application of a balancing test that weighs the public interest in disclosure against the individual's privacy interest.

The regulatory context for the New Hampshire legal system provides further framing for how RSA 91-A interacts with administrative law and agency rulemaking obligations.

Common scenarios

Public records requests from journalists and researchers: A reporter submitting a request for police incident reports, salary data, or meeting minutes invokes RSA 91-A:4. Disputes over redactions — particularly in police records — frequently cite the privacy exemption and have generated an ongoing body of New Hampshire Superior Court and Supreme Court decisions.

School board and municipal meeting access: Citizens challenging closed executive sessions at school board or selectboard meetings file complaints under RSA 91-A:7 and 91-A:8. The statute provides a civil cause of action in Superior Court, and a prevailing plaintiff may recover attorney's fees if the court finds the denial was not made in good faith.

Electronic records disputes: Following the 2008 amendments, disputes over access to government employees' e-mails, text messages sent on personal devices in the course of official business, and metadata attached to electronic documents have reached New Hampshire courts. The New Hampshire Supreme Court has addressed the scope of "governmental records" in this context on multiple occasions.

**Contrast — RSA 91-A vs. The federal Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) allows agencies up to 20 business days to respond and has a separate fee-waiver framework for media and educational requesters. State law is more restrictive in some exemptions (e.g., New Hampshire does not adopt the federal deliberative process privilege by name) and more permissive in others.

For related procedural questions about navigating New Hampshire's administrative law framework, the New Hampshire Administrative Law page is the relevant reference.

Decision boundaries

Practitioners and public bodies applying RSA 91-A must navigate a set of threshold determinations before reaching the merits of a disclosure question:

Is the entity a "public body"? Quasi-public entities — advisory boards, task forces, and committees — qualify only if they exercise governmental authority or are composed primarily of public officials. Purely advisory bodies with no decision-making power may fall outside the statute's scope.

Is the document a "governmental record"? Documents created by private contractors performing government functions may or may not qualify. New Hampshire courts apply a functional test focused on whether the record was created or maintained in the course of public business.

Does an exemption apply? RSA 91-A:5 provides the primary exemption list, but courts also recognize exemptions created by other statutes (e.g., RSA 169-C for DCYF records, RSA 329 for certain medical licensing records). Exemptions are construed narrowly against the government.

Is the privacy balancing test satisfied? For records not covered by a categorical exemption, the New Hampshire Supreme Court uses a balancing test derived from its interpretation of RSA 91-A:5, IV, weighing whether disclosure would constitute an "invasion of privacy" unreasonable in light of the public interest.

What remedy is available? A wrongful denial may be challenged in Merrimack County Superior Court under RSA 91-A:7. Attorney's fees are available under RSA 91-A:8 if the court finds the denial was not in good faith. Injunctive and declaratory relief are both available remedies.

The broader landscape of civil rights protections connected to government transparency is addressed on the New Hampshire Civil Rights Legal Framework page. For a full overview of the New Hampshire legal system and its interconnected statutory areas, the New Hampshire Legal Services Authority homepage provides the primary entry point to the reference network.

References

• RSA Chapter 91-A — Access to Governmental Records and Meetings (NH General Court)
• RSA 91-A:1-a — Definitions (NH General Court)
• New Hampshire General Court — Full Text of RSA Title VII
• New Hampshire Supreme Court — Published Opinions
• Federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Cornell LII)
• New Hampshire Department of Justice — Attorney General's Office
• New Hampshire Office of Legislative Services