Bill to expand free open‑records time draws strong opposition from city and county officials

Representative Jim Casper introduced House Bill 13‑06 to allow each North Dakota resident one open‑records request per year that would be fulfilled up to 20 hours free of charge by public entities.

“House Bill 13‑06…any constituent can request one open record per year free of charge up to 20 hours of agency time,” Casper told the committee after presenting an amendment that reduced the free time from an earlier draft’s 40 hours.

Casper said the policy is intended to reduce the financial burden on citizens seeking public records; the bill retains existing statutory per‑page and per‑hour charges beyond the free hours. “Let’s give our constituents a little more free service from the state and the employees and the departments,” he said.

City and county officials, school administrators and recorders testified in opposition or expressed concern. Corey Peterson of the North Dakota League of Cities told the committee that many municipalities do not have staff dedicated to records requests and that requests can require coordination with police, engineering and attorneys. He described body‑worn camera and 911 requests as especially time‑intensive because of the need to redact personally identifiable information: “Open records request for a 911 call could easily consume 40 hours of work,” he said, and estimated the cost of 19 additional free hours could amount to “a loss of $450 per request at the current rate of $25 an hour.”

Cass County Recorder Deb Mueller and other county witnesses told the committee counties already provide free, time‑limited help and web self‑service options, and argued expanded free hours would force counties to hire additional staff or otherwise shift costs to local taxpayers. Mueller said many professional users—realtors, appraisers, law firms—currently pay for data access and that the bill could let businesses obtain substantial free staff time.

School administrators likewise told the committee the current law helps prevent repeated, targeted requests that are costly to redact. Amy Kopas, representing K‑12 administrators, said districts frequently point requesters to online resources and provide help when requests are narrow; she said the current regime generally works.

Questions from committee members focused on how local offices track requesters, whether the fee rate covers actual costs, and how to prevent abuse by repeated or broad requests. Several witnesses noted current law limits questions about a requester’s identity and said the bill’s one‑per‑year provision could be difficult to verify without creating privacy or administrative burdens.

The League of Cities and county associations urged the committee to consider alternatives such as raising hourly fees rather than expanding free hours. No committee vote on HB 13‑06 was recorded in the hearing transcript.

Why it matters: The bill would transfer the immediate labor cost for fulfilling some records requests from requesters to local governments. Opponents say that would increase costs for taxpayers and require hiring additional staff; proponents framed it as improving public access and citizen affordability.

What’s next: The committee heard extensive testimony from municipal and county officials and education representatives. If the committee advances the bill, members said they may consider fiscal impacts and possible amendments to limit abuse or to adjust fee rates.