Paragraph III: the records, and the 15-day clock

Associations must maintain eleven categories of records. The core of the list, as it reached the statute: "detailed records of receipts and expenditures affecting the operation and administration of the association and other appropriate accounting records, minutes of all meetings of its shareholders or members and board of directors other than executive sessions, a record of all actions taken by the shareholders or members or board of directors without a meeting, and a record of all actions taken by a committee in place of the board of directors on behalf of the association, and the names of shareholders or members in a form that permits preparation of a list of the names of all shareholders or members and the addresses at which the association communicates with them."

The production standard is 15 days' notice, on a request identifying the materials sought. This resolves a discrepancy in circulating summaries: some described a five-day deadline, others a fifteen-day notice period. The statute says 15 days' notice.

Copying fees are capped. They "shall not exceed the charge for copying a governmental record as provided for in RSA 91-A:4, IV(d)" — the Right-to-Know Law's rate. A board cannot price a records request out of existence.

Five categories may be withheld: personnel records, ongoing negotiations, litigation matters, attorney communications, and executive session records.

Paragraph IV: executive session gets a closed list

Executive session is restricted to four purposes: consultation with an attorney, discussion of litigation, personnel matters, and sensitive negotiations.

And the sentence that changes the most behaviour: "No final vote or action shall be taken during an executive session."

For a great many New Hampshire boards that is a genuine change in practice. Going into executive session to settle a contentious decision and emerging with it made is common, and from January 1 it is unlawful. The deliberation may be closed. The vote must not be.

Paragraph V: conflicts of interest

Where a board member or an owner has a financial interest in a proposed contract, the statute requires written disclosure to the members, approval by a majority, and recusal of the interested party from the vote.

The recusal requirement is the operative one in small New Hampshire associations, where the board member who owns the landscaping company is frequently the only person willing to do the work. The statute does not prohibit the contract. It prohibits that person voting on it, and it requires the membership to be told in writing.

What a board must do before January 1

Four things, none of which requires a lawyer.

Reconstruct the record set. Eleven categories is more than most volunteer-run New Hampshire associations currently keep. Minutes of member meetings, minutes of board meetings, records of actions taken without a meeting, records of committee actions taken in place of the board, accounting records, and a member roster with communication addresses. An association that has been operating by email thread has "actions taken without a meeting" scattered across inboxes, and those are now a record category.

Write down the production process. Who receives a request, who logs the date, who assembles, who decides on an exemption, who sends it. Fifteen days is not long for a volunteer board, and the deadline runs whether or not anyone is available.

Change the executive session habit. Deliberate in closed session if the subject qualifies; return to open session to vote; record the vote in the minutes.

Ask the board about interests. Once, in writing, now — not when a contract is on the table.

The enforcement question, and its honest answer

The Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau within the Department of Justice administers and enforces the requirements. The bill's fiscal note contemplated the department needing two unclassified attorneys and a paralegal, at roughly $365,000 in fiscal year 2027.

Whether that capacity materializes is the open question, and it is the difference between a right and a right on paper. New Hampshire has no agency that hears association governance disputes; the Bureau's existing condominium role under RSA 356-B reaches the developer's offering stage, not boards. This is a new function.

The realistic near-term expectation is that an owner denied records has a statute to cite and a court to cite it in — which is considerably more than they had, and considerably less than a tribunal.

What to watch next

Whether the Bureau issues guidance or a form before January 1, and whether the fiscal note's positions are funded. Watch also for the first disputes about the eleven categories — particularly "actions taken by a committee in place of the board," which is a category many associations have never documented as such.