Much of the discussion of the 2021 Legislative Session centered around what exactly a “new normal” for Oregon will look like. In addition to hybrid work plans, less stringent dress codes, and more appreciation for a work-life balance, many were focused on the future of public access to official decision-making. Policymakers pursued a couple measures related to public records and public meetings this session which may provide some indication of where we are heading.

One bill that quickly made it through the legislative process with strong bipartisan support is HB 2560. The measure requires governing bodies to provide remote access to meetings and allow members of the public to submit both oral and written testimony, to the extent reasonable. In other words, the adaptations local governments made to comply with pandemic restrictions on public meetings are likely here to stay. Challenges in implementing this new law include broadband access, hacked remote meetings, and costly technology. 

While it did not move forward, HB 2485 will likely return in a future session. The bill came at the request of the Society of Professional Journalists and would have required local governments to reduce public records request fees by 50 percent if the request is in the public interest, however, “in the public interest” is not defined in the bill. Additionally, the bill would require local governments to waive the fee altogether, if the request was narrowly tailored and in the public interest. The term “narrowly tailored” is broadly defined in the bill.  Notably, if the request comes from a member of the news media (undefined in the bill), the request is automatically considered to be of public interest. The only way for a local government to preserve its fees would be to hold public meetings where the governing body resolves not to adopt a fee waiver.

HB 2485 raises a number of questions. What constitutes public interest? What is considered narrowly tailored? And what services might local governments have to cut to comply with the loss of fee revenue? Counties should spend time now analyzing their public records request processes for cost-effectiveness should the bill return.

Contributed by: Tyler Janzen | Legislative Affairs Manager