Advisory councils exist because government works best when the people most affected by public policy have a meaningful voice. They bring together citizens, professionals, individuals with lived experience and state officials to identify unmet needs, advise policymakers, improve public services and strengthen communication between government and the communities they serve. When they fulfill that mission, they strengthen public trust.
Over the past several months, I attended meetings of New Hampshire’s Council on Autism Spectrum Disorders, submitted multiple Right-to-Know requests and reviewed hundreds of pages of public records. I did not begin this work with a predetermined conclusion. I simply wanted to understand how a state advisory council created to represent New Hampshire’s autism community was carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Legislature.
That work led me to a broader question — one that extends well beyond House Bill 1337.
HB 1337 proposed repealing the Autism Council, removing its statutory responsibilities and eliminating its role in certain state advisory structures. After passing both the House and Senate with bipartisan support, the bill was ultimately vetoed by Gov. Kelly Ayotte.
In her veto message, Ayotte described the Council as a volunteer advisory body that brings together state agencies, providers, self-advocates and families. She noted that the Council does not receive a separate state appropriation and expressed concern that repealing it would eliminate an important forum for collaboration and advice on autism-related issues.
Reasonable people can disagree about whether those reasons justified vetoing HB 1337. Respectful disagreement is a healthy part of the legislative process.
For me, however, the veto raised a broader question: When the state creates an advisory council to represent a community, what should citizens have the right to expect?
The public records I reviewed did not answer every question. Instead, they prompted new ones.
How should the public measure whether an advisory council is fulfilling the responsibilities assigned to it by law while maintaining appropriate transparency regarding meetings, appointments, decision-making, and public records?
How should taxpayer-supported administrative resources be explained, even when council members themselves serve as volunteers?
How should government respond when citizens seek records showing how statutory responsibilities are being carried out?
These are not accusations. They are questions rooted in the public record and in the belief that government earns trust by operating openly, responding to legitimate public questions and demonstrating accountability.
This conversation is about more than HB 1337. It is about the relationship between government and the people it serves.
Families raising autistic children, autistic adults, caregivers, educators, providers and advocates deserve advisory bodies that encourage meaningful participation and demonstrate through their work that they are fulfilling the responsibilities entrusted to them by the Legislature.
Transparency should never be viewed as a burden. It is one of the foundations of good government. Public oversight is not an obstacle to effective public service — it is one of the ways citizens ensure that public institutions remain worthy of their trust.
The veto of HB 1337 ended one legislative proposal, but it should not end the conversation. Regardless of where one stood on the bill or the Governor’s decision, this is an opportunity for legislators, state officials, Council members, self-advocates, providers, families and citizens to reaffirm the principles that make public service effective: transparency, accountability, responsiveness and meaningful public participation.
As a parent, disability advocate and New Hampshire citizen, my goal is not to diminish the importance of having a voice for the autism community. My hope is that every public advisory body representing that community earns the public’s confidence through openness, integrity, responsiveness and measurable public service.
Every New Hampshire family deserves public institutions worthy of their trust. Accountability should never be feared. It should be embraced as one of the highest responsibilities of public service.
Shannon Bouchard lives in Sandown.