Idaho committee backs bill letting some counties post monthly commissioners’ notices online instead of in newspapers

BOISE — The House Local Government Committee on Tuesday voted to give House Bill 267 a do-pass recommendation to the full House, approving language that would allow county boards of commissioners in counties that maintain publicly accessible, regularly updated websites to stop publishing their monthly acts, minutes and brief financial summaries in local newspapers.

Representative Lucas Kaler, R‑District 11, introduced the bill. “It allows a county commissioner board to cease the publication of their agenda, their minutes, and their monthly financial summaries in the local newspaper if they already have a website that is publicly accessible and maintained with all of that information,” Kaler said.

The bill drew sharply divided testimony. County officials and supporters argued the change would save local governments money and direct residents to more complete, searchable online agendas. Canyon County Commissioner Zach Brooks told the committee that since his county installed a web-based agenda system “our public records requests have basically gone to 0,” and that the county’s site now provides minutes, audio and linked documents.

Newspaper publishers and the Idaho Newspaper Association urged rejection. Nathan Alford, editor and publisher of the Lewiston Tribune and the Moscow‑Pullman Daily News, said moving required legal notices to county websites “would effectively eliminate legal notice publication requirements in counties for community newspapers of record” and warned that printed, third‑party notices serve as a safeguard against “backroom deals, quiet tax increases or worse, even corruption.” Matt Tranquill, president and publisher of the Idaho Press, said transferring notices to individual county sites “would create confusion and make it nearly impossible for the public to track when their legal notices are published.”

Several witnesses, including attorneys for the newspaper association, focused on drafting questions in the bill. Jeremy Pisco, an attorney representing the Newspaper Association of Idaho, said the bill’s wording creates “a great big circular cloud of confusion” because it does not define “published” and contains language that could be read to both require and not require publication.

Committee members asked about archive and security practices for electronic records. Commissioner Brooks said Canyon County retains meeting audio and uses server capacity to preserve records; Kelly Brasfield of the Idaho Association of Counties pointed the committee to Idaho Code retention rules and reported an association poll estimating roughly $506,000 in annual savings for counties if broader publication changes were adopted at local levels (the association gave a statewide savings figure for several local government types combined of approximately $807,000 per year).

Representative Kaler closed by emphasizing that the bill “only applies to the county commissioner boards and their monthly publication of their minutes, agendas, and brief financial summaries for that month” and does not remove other legal‑notice requirements governed by Title 60. He cited existing statute in chapter 1, Title 60, Idaho Code as remaining in effect.

Votes at a glance: House Bill 267 — do‑pass recommendation to the floor; roll‑call tally: 10 yes, 1 no, 4 absent. Outcome: motion carries.

The committee discussion included both technical questions about web traffic and archiving and broader concerns about public access. Opponents said newspapers provide third‑party verification and a durable printed archive; supporters said county websites can provide fuller, searchable records and reduce repetitive public‑records requests. The bill will next go to the House floor for further action.