Twenty-eight lawmakers dissented Wednesday as the Massachusetts House voted to set new terms around what state Auditor Diana DiZoglio would be able to review in the legislative audit voters authorized her to carry out in 2024.

Almost all House Democrats voted for the measure, which also proposes to make more state government records accessible to the public. Three Democrats — Cambridge Rep. Mike Connolly, Attleboro Rep. Jim Hawkins and Fall River Rep. Alan Silvia — joined the body’s 25 Republicans in voting no.

Speaker Ron Mariano said the bill responds to an ongoing call from voters for more transparency out of Beacon Hill and provides a path forward in lieu of a what he called “politically motivated audit conducted in violation of the Constitution.”

Leaders of the House and Senate have resisted DiZoglio’s audit push, arguing that a probe by the auditor’s office would run afoul of the separation of powers laid out in the state Constitution, bringing the legislative branch under the review of a piece of the executive branch.

“We are not accountable to any constitutional officer,” said Rep. Mindy Domb, an Amherst Democrat. “We are only accountable to our constituents.”

Taunton Rep. Lisa Field, a Democrat in her first term, said she was among the 72% of Massachusetts voters who backed the audit ballot question in 2024.

“Due to legitimate concerns and questions about constitutional privileges and separation of powers, we have been stuck on this audit issue for more than a year,” Field said. “Let’s not be like Washington, D.C. and accept such gridlock — not about the audit and not about public records. Let’s not let perfect be the enemy of good progress.”

The House’s bill would authorize DiZoglio to review what it defines as the “administrative functions” of the Legislature, going back to the 2021 fiscal year. Those areas include the adoption of annual budgets, official audits of the House and Senate by independent firms, spending by both chambers, and the execution of any financial settlements with lawmakers and employees.

It would also newly apply the state’s public records law to the governor’s office, and create a process by which people could request and receive certain legislative files.

Massachusetts is currently the only state where the Legislature, governor and judiciary all claim to be exempt from the public records law.

Warren Republican Rep. Todd Smola described the process that led up to Wednesday’s vote as opaque in and of itself. Mariano last week said the House would take up what he called comprehensive transparency legislation, but did not say when or what, specifically, the bill would do.

The bill was circulated to members of the House Ways and Means Committee around 10:30 a.m. Tuesday, and committee members had a little over a half hour to vote on whether to advance it. Smola, the ranking Republican on the committee, said during that 34-minute window, “we had members on both sides of the political aisle that were calling each other back and forth to say, ‘Can you explain this portion to me?’”

“We are so much better than the process that has unfolded,” he said. “And for the sake of people that are asking us for transparency, that is not transparency. That’s the opposite of transparency.”

Rep. Michael Soter, a Bellingham Republican, said he was particularly concerned with a part of the bill that removes the courts from settling disputes between the auditor and the Legislature.

He said that by setting its own rules around an audit, the House would be “ensuring the auditor can only see exactly what we allow her to see and nothing more.”

It’s not clear yet if the Senate will pass the bill. Last week, state senators voted to turn over a limited set of documents to DiZoglio. The documents the Senate plans to provide mirror the records she would be allowed to review under the House bill.

Asked if he expected the Senate to agree to the legislation, Mariano on Tuesday said only, “I talked to the Senate.”