Legislature should drop notice changes

The state legislature is considering legislation that would end requirements for cities and counties to publish legal notices in a newspaper of general circulation in their region.

It's touted as a measure to lower costs and ease time demands on city and county offices.

I think the effect will be to increase the disconnect between citizens and their elected officials and local government, and this legislation should be rejected.

Legal notices encompass a variety of notices. Some are notices for environmental reviews of proposed projects; some are calls for bids on public works projects, and others notify people of planned foreclosure actions. Readers of The Eagle will have seen the variety. The requirement to publish makes sure that the information gets to the public and the people involved in the action.

Publishing legal notices in a newspaper provides a central forum already accessed by a large number of people in an area. The notices come to the people; they don't have to search for them on the Internet.

The legislation introduced Friday in both houses of the legislature would give the state's cities and counties the option of placing their government notices on their websites instead of publishing them in their designated legal newspapers.

If this effort succeeds, state agencies, fire districts, school districts, ports, PUDs and every other public agency in Washington probably will demand -- and get -- similar treatment. Foreclosure notices and summons by publication will follow.

It's easy to see the likely sequence that will mean the end of public and legal notices as we know them.

This seems like an enormous step backwards in terms of government accountability. The small savings -- a fraction of a percent of typical government agency budgets, is far overshadowed by the huge downside for citizens who need to know what their government is doing in their name.

It seems like an issue that transcends the lines like liberal or conservative or Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or Tea Party; this is something that should concern all citizens. In my 36 years in the news business, I've seen countless steps by government to limit or control the flow of information, and this, to me, is just another one of these steps.

How important are public notices? People in western Wahkiakum County found out about the proposal to dispose of biosolids on a Grays River Valley ranch through a public notice. How many would have gone looking for something like this on a local government website? Few, if any.

Here are some other problems:

--Throwing up public notices on a government website -- and many smaller government entities don't have them -- doesn't satisfy notice requirements or serve the public. Many people, especially seniors, don't have internet access, have limited web skills if they do, and should not have to search for this information, and they won't. Government websites show dismal traffic numbers.

People are used to seeing public notices in a newspaper that's delivered to their doorstep or mailbox. In a statewide readership survey in 2009 conducted for Washington Newspaper Publishers Association by Pulse Research, 86 percent of respondents agreed that agencies should be required to publish legal notices in their newspapers; 53 percent said they or members of their households regularly read public notices in their newspapers.

--If passed, this legislation would cost newspaper jobs, and it could produce the demise of some small weeklies that rely on the revenues from public notices to keep their doors open. Every newspaper in the state authorized to publish legals would suffer at a time when they're all struggling with a prolonged economic recession. This includes The Eagle.

--Finally, this is simply bad public policy. Government employees are the citizens' employees, and keeping their bosses -- us -- informed of what they're doing is the paramount task of government. Legislators should remember they represent the public, not the special interests of governmental agencies, and they should protect the public's interests.

You can be sure that I'll be calling two sponsors of the bills, Rep. Dean Takko and Sen. Brian Hatfield. I would hope that other concerned citizens will contact them, too.

HB 1478: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1478&year=2011#documents

Sponsors: Springer, Asay, Takko, Orcutt, Haler, Rivers, Eddy, Hunt, Klippert, Sullivan, Goodman, Clibborn, Armstrong, Probst, Jacks. Rep. Takko (360) 786-7806; http://www.leg.wa.gov/house/representatives/pages/Takko.aspx.

SB 5360: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5360&year=2011

Sponsors: Swecker, Pridemore, Zarelli, Hatfield, Benton, Fraser, Haugen, Sheldon, Hobbs, Roach, Prentice, Fain, Shin. Sen. Hatfield (360) 786-7636; http://www.leg.wa.gov/senate/senators/pages/Hatfield.aspx.