Requires written public comments on bills to be preserved in each bill's permanent record and directs standing legislative committees to prepare reports explaining whether public comments influenced their recommendations.
relative to the documentation and preservation of public comment reports by standing legislative committees.
HB1114 would require standing legislative committees to document and preserve reports of public comments received on each bill, including a written explanation of how the comments were considered and whether they influenced the committee's recommendation. Testimony on this docket is overwhelmingly supportive; submitters describe feeling that their in-person and remote testimony on other bills has been ignored by committees and argue this measure would increase transparency and accountability, while a smaller cluster of submissions addresses banning wildlife killing contests directly rather than the documentation requirement itself.
Submitters describe committees disregarding, discarding, or failing to record written and remote testimony, and argue the bill would hold legislators accountable by requiring documented responses to public input.
“It has come to my attention that thousands upon thousands of public comments on a wide range of issues have been disregarded, ignored, trashed, or killed. This disregard for THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE is wrong.”
— Lucille Thibodeau, Nashua · #533061 — read full submission →
“Listening to the public has been a cornerstone of the NH Legislature. To find out that all the many comments I have sent in have been ignored is a slap in the face.”
— Mary Anne Broshek, Peterborough · #542116 — read full submission →
Submitters argue that remote and written testimony is essential for people who cannot attend hearings in Concord due to work schedules, disability, caregiving responsibilities, or distance, and that this testimony deserves equal weight with in-person testimony.
“Caregivers of disabled children and adults often cannot attend in-person hearings due to medical needs, behavioral support requirements, lack of respite care, transportation barriers, or the unpredictable nature of disability itself.”
— Seana Hallberg, Dover · #540520 — read full submission →
“The vast majority of constituents cannot take the time from work or childcare to speak in person, making online testimony a vital part of our democracy.”
— Lyssa Bayne-Kim, Durham · #541108 — read full submission →
Submitters point to the bill's specific mechanism requiring a written report explaining how public comments were weighed and whether they influenced a committee's recommendation, arguing this improves clarity around legislative decision-making.
“These reports, overseen by the committee chair and the ranking member from the minority party, or their designee, would explain clearly how public comments were considered by the committee and how/why the comments did or did not influence the Committee's recommendation on the bill.”
— Susan Tarczewski, Claremont · #542230 — read full submission →
“A publicly available written narrative overview of the nature of comments submitted and a tally of pro and con comments would, at the very least, encourage legislators to explain the reasoning for their vote”
— Mark Mattson, Portsmouth · #552627 — read full submission →
Submitters argue that documenting and preserving public comments creates a lasting historical record valuable to future lawmakers, researchers, and the public.
“Keeping a record of public comment is the best way to preserve the views and voices of constituents as they weigh in support or opposition of a particular bill.”
— Judith Blachek, Nashua · #540225 — read full submission →
“The public has the right to comment on proposed legislation and for that commentary to be retained in the public record.”
— Laura Holmes, Northwood · #549907 — read full submission →
Submitters invoke the general democratic principle that elected officials are obligated to represent and be accountable to the constituents who elected them, independent of any specific example.
Submitters point to specific recent bills, most often the 2025 wildlife killing contest bill (HB589) and the expanded school voucher (EFA) program, as concrete examples where substantial public comment was disregarded by a committee.
“Last year when HB 589 was submitted to ban wildlife killing contests in NH, hundreds of public comments were ignored entirely by the committee.”
— Tim Buxton, Shelburne · #542485 — read full submission →
“While the people testifying in favor of the school voucher program were never interrupted by the Committee Chair, every one of our little group from Moultonborough were told that we did not need to speak on the matter.”
— Cornelia Schneider, Moultonborough · #548730 — read full submission →
A small number of otherwise-supportive submitters caution that the bill relies on the same committees accused of ignoring input to report on themselves, and could allow representatives to selectively cherry-pick which comments to highlight.
“I am not sure that this bill will pass as we are essentially asking those responsible for ignoring us in the first place to police themselves! I hope I am wrong!”
— Nancy Cook, New Boston · #545501 — read full submission →
“This bill would create a dangerous precedent where representatives could cherrypick citizen comments and ignore anything they disagree with.”
— Kavita Finn, Bedford · #552247 — read full submission →
A cluster of submissions filed on this docket argues against wildlife killing contests directly (e.g., glue traps, coyote hunts) without addressing HB1114's documentation and reporting requirement, suggesting some testimony may have been intended for a different bill.
“Glue traps are inherently cruel. Please picture your pet glued to a table where no matter how hard they struggle they will never be free from.”
— Denise Muccioli, Nashua · #524864 — read full submission →
“Killing contests are NOT Sport. It is a barbaric practice which enables abuses to kills "for fun/sport" in any way possible just to win.”
— Anna-Marie Sparks, Loudon · #550379 — read full submission →
Generated by claude-sonnet-5 (claude code agent) on Jul 20, 2026. Quotes are verbatim excerpts, verified against the cited submission before publication. Summaries are AI interpretation of the record, not part of it.
Over the years I have spent many hours thinking about and then signing in on bills, occasionally also writing a few sentences about my reasoning. It outrages me that some (not all) committees have not taken public opinion, including mine, into account when considering whether or not to approve bills. HB 1114 is a necessary corrective to the failure of some representatives to do their jobs!
I sent my testimony to all committee members via legislative email. Thank you!
I strongly support this bill. What is the point of taking the time to comment, if our testimonies are not preserved in some way?
Please support passage of this bill. It presents a highly respectful method of honoring the public’s voice on legislation for all of us who may not be able to attend hearings in person or in real time, which is important to honor those who are working, parenting, schooling or caregiving loved ones and who cannot otherwise attend in person. Thank you for considering this testimony.
I want to know exactly how committee members form their opinions from the input of the public they serve. Of the people, FOR the people (not themselves, lobbyists or those offering the largest kickback)
I think that it is only fair and correct that since when the committee members votes on a bill in committee and the members of the committee are supposed to take into consideration the testimony submitted to the committee then it is only a proper act that committee submit a report for the record as to why, either in favor or against, the committee including a record of all members voted. There should never be a time that a legislator should not at least consider the opinion of the public who has taken the time and trouble to let the members of a committee know what they think. The public's testimony should never be thrown out and ignored. If a committee can't do this then they should not be elected members of the New Hampshire General Court.
Here's one of my past testimonies from last February. It pertains to HB 589, a perfect example of a Bill largely ignored or swept aside, even though it had overwhelming support from the public: "My family and I have recently moved to New Hampshire and made the trek of 3,200 miles to get here from California. I am a wildlife conservationist and know the dire consequences of "wildlife management" when it takes the form of a "blood sport". Killing coyotes in these barbaric contests appeals to the lowest common denominator of mankind. Is that what we really want? Trophies and awards should be given to Competitive Athletes, Heroes, Veterans and First Responders, NOT greedy, heartless hunters! House Bill 589 needs to pass unanimously, In 2020, Senate Bill 588 was introduced and would have most likely passed if it hadn't been stalled by the pandemic. It's high time that we outlaw these brutal wildlife killing contests in New Hampshire. Please Vote for House Bill 589!" A DOCUMENTED CASE OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY IGNORED -- During a 2025 executive session for House Bill 589 to prohibit wildlife hunting contests, the Fish and Game and Marine Resources Committee appeared unaware of the online testimony totals when it voted to kill the bill.* AND HERE'S THE KICKER: Online testimony tallies for the bill showed a whopping 590 people in support, compared to just 50 in opposition, but the Committee didn’t even look at those numbers. I followed through by email with one of the Committee members of Fish and Game who had this to say "Through all sorts of machinations, it may (may not) pass this session b/c of some issues with wording." Sadly, it's not the first time good Bills have failed due to a misunderstanding or careless disregard of public comments. Fortunately, we can remedy the situation with the passage of House Bill 1114 which would require legislative committees to preserve all public comments — both written testimony and comments submitted online — and prepare a report explaining how public input did or did not affect their recommendations. Let's do this! We can restore public trust in our local legislative process. You may contact me at the phone number below with the good news (cellphone unchanged from California). I thank you in advance for your enthusiastic support. Jacqueline Texier-Calhoun Plymouth, NH (510) 857-9745
Legislative and committee review of public comments on submitted bills should be required to completely represent public opinion on each bill before legislators vote on that bill. A publicly available written narrative overview of the nature of comments submitted and a tally of pro and con comments would, at the very least, encourage legislators to explain the reasoning for their vote pro or con on each bill and provide the voting public the ability to judge their legislator’s actions.
I support the documentation and preservation of public comments on legislation.
I believe strongly that the citizens of NH need to be allowed to be heard. I support the preservation of public comments. Thank you.
I support this bill because I feel it is important for representative to represent the majority of people in their district and state and not special interests. Public support for a bill should be part of the presentation process and transparent. If representatives are supposed to represent their district and state, then it should be known if they are not fairly representing the public's interests. This bill will show public opinion and testimony on any bill. The public should know about that and so should their representatives.
I am simply submitting my strong support for this bill and do not wish to speak publicly at the hearing. Thank you.
You cannot have a representative democracy if citizens are unable to access their representatives. This bill would create a dangerous precedent where representatives could cherrypick citizen comments and ignore anything they disagree with. That would be disastrous, and counter to the founding principles of this country.
I support this bill because I think it will preserve public comment so it will be possible to determine if legislators follow wishes of constituents.
I support this bill that would make NH lawmakers take seriously input by its voting citizens. I want to hold NH lawmakers accountable to all citizens by requiring them to acknowledge, and report responses to, public comments. I want them to write a report explaining how the submitted public comments influenced their recommendations on each bill. Public input to our elected lawmakers lets them hear what is important to the voters of New Hampshire.
Documenting and preserving public comment reports is a sensible and helpful practice. Those of us who provide comments expect that legislators will take our opinions into account, even if they ultimately disagree. Keeping records can only encourage thoughtful consideration of public input.
I support this bill
Last year in the New Hampshire House, a bill that would have protected coyotes from wildlife killing contests failed in committee without meaningful consideration of the public comments submitted. Not everyone can take time off from work or family responsibilities to attend legislative hearings, but that does not mean their voices should be ignored. The wildlife killing contest bill received significant public support, yet that support was not meaningfully considered. House Bill 1114 will change that by requiring committees to file a report documenting all public testimony and comments. I support this bill.
This would show if committees were totally disregarding how the public thinks they should be voting to support the public will.
I support this bill - It's important to preserve reports and public comments made to standing legislative committees.
I support this bill because it strengthens transparency, accountability, and public trust in the legislative process. I've seen votes that don't support what the public is asking for and it's important to understand how lawmakers are taking their constituents' asks into consideration. Members of the public take time to submit written testimony, attend hearings, and participate through the state’s remote sign-in system. Preserving these comments as part of the permanent record ensures that public input is treated as a meaningful component of lawmaking, not a temporary or disposable one. Requiring committees to summarize public comments and explain how they did or did not influence recommendations improves clarity around legislative decision-making. It helps constituents understand how their voices are weighed and provides future lawmakers, researchers, and the public with valuable context for how bills were considered. By organizing and preserving committee records in a consistent and transparent manner, this bill reinforces the integrity of the legislative process while maintaining appropriate safeguards against duplicate, irrelevant, or improper submissions. Overall, this is a reasonable and important step toward a more open and accountable government.
Preserving information, rather than destroying it, should always be the goal.
Hear the public..
It is ethical to keep records as y’all should’ve been doing throughout history
All testimony however delivered should be given equal weight and preserved.