Proyectos de ley › 89.ª Asamblea General

SF 2322Firmado por gobernador(a) · 2 de mayo de 2022

Relating to the assessment of fees when a person requests examination and copying of public records

Presentado por el comité State Government (successor To Sf 218) del Senado

Temas:State government

La misma legislación: SF 218, HF 637, SF 480, HF 786

Dónde está ahora

  1. Hecho: Presentado2 de febrero de 2021
  2. Hecho: Subcomité4 de febrero de 2021
  3. Hecho: Comité del Senado25 de febrero de 2021
  4. Hecho: Lo aprueba el Senado23 de febrero de 202248–0
  5. Hecho: Comité de la Cámara15 de marzo de 2022
  6. Hecho: Lo aprueba la Cámara24 de marzo de 202293–0
  7. Hecho: A gobernador(a)2 de mayo de 2022
  8. Hecho: Firmado como ley2 de mayo de 2022

Firmado como ley ¿Qué es el embudo (funnel)?

Qué contiene

Resumen con IA Government agencies must try their best to provide public records for free if the request takes less than ten minutes to complete, though people may still have to pay for the actual cost of copies. When charging fees, officials can only include the costs of supervising the work and making copies. They are also allowed to charge for legal help only if it is needed to hide private information in the documents. If someone thinks the fees are too high, they have the right to challenge them. (Todavía no está traducido al español.)1

Lea la explicación oficial (en inglés)

This bill relates to fees associated with public records requests. The bill provides that although fulfillment of a request for copies of public records may be contingent upon receipt of payment of reasonable expenses, the lawful custodian shall make every reasonable effort to provide the public records at no cost other than copy costs for a record that takes less than minutes to produce. A person is allowed to contest the reasonableness of the fees charged by the custodian. The bill provides that actual costs shall only include reasonable expenses directly attributable to supervising the examination of and making of copies of public records. Costs for legal services shall only be charged for the redaction or review of confidential information.

Texto completo del proyecto (en inglés) · Qué cambió antes de aprobarse2

House subcommittee

Named March 2, 2022. On March 9, 2022 it recommended passage. Vote Total: 2-1.

Three legislators hear a bill first and recommend what the committee should do; it’s the best time to weigh in. How to take part

Nota fiscal

Minimal Compare con otros proyectos

Resumen con IA This bill requires public record custodians to provide records for only the cost of copying if the request takes less than 30 minutes and limits legal fees to the redaction of confidential information. It is not possible to estimate the overall fiscal impact on state agencies or local governments at this time. The impact may vary depending on the size of the entity and the volume of future record requests. (en inglés)3

Lea la nota fiscal (en inglés)

Description

Senate File 2322 relates to the assessment of fees associated with public record requests under Iowa Code chapter 22. The Bill provides that the lawful custodian of public records must make every reasonable effort to provide a requested public record at no cost other than copying costs for a record that takes less than 30 minutes to produce. If expenses are necessary, such expenses must be reasonable. A requester may contest the reasonableness of the custodian’s expenses as provided for in Iowa Code chapter 22. The Bill also provides that costs for legal services should only be utilized for the redaction or review of legally protected confidential information.

Background

Under Iowa Code chapter 22, all expenses for the examination and copying of public records are paid by the person desiring to examine or copy the record. Government bodies may include charges directly attributable to supervising the examination of public records, providing copies of public records, and cannot include charges for ordinary expenses or costs such as employment benefits, depreciation, maintenance, electricity, or insurance associated with the administration of the office.

Assumptions

  • There may be an increase in the quantity of public record requests and the scope of public record requests due to lower fees assessed to obtain records.
  • There may be unrecovered costs of public record requests for governmental entities.
  • Costs may vary for governmental entities based on size and average volume of existing public records requests, as well as the variability of requests throughout a fiscal year.
  • Costs may vary for governmental entities based on the extent to which fees are already absorbed by the entity and the fee rate charged to the requester.
  • Not all State agencies and local government entities receiving public record requests may incur increased costs as a result of this Bill.

Fiscal Impact

The estimated fiscal impact of SF 2322 may vary across State agencies. In a sample survey of agencies of various sizes that responded to a request for information to the Legislative Services Agency, the majority stated that there would be no fiscal impact or that any fiscal impact is likely to be minimal. However, due to the variability across agencies and the inability to predict the volume of future open record requests, it is not possible to estimate the overall fiscal impact to State agencies at this time. In the instance of increased public record requests, it is possible that agencies may request additional full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. The fiscal impact of SF 2322 on local governments also cannot be estimated at this time. Additional costs that may be absorbed by a local government are expected to vary based on the size of the entity, the current hourly rate charged for services, and the volume and scope of the requests received in a given year. Not all local government entities may experience a fiscal impact as a result of this Bill.

Sources

  • Iowa League of Cities
  • Various State agencies

Cómo leer una nota fiscal4

Lo que cambia del Código de Iowa (Iowa Code)

Modifica§22.3

Cómo funciona el Código5

Cabildeo

13 a favor · 10 en contra · 36 indecisos · Quiénes →

Family tree

Tried before

This idea has been filed in an earlier General Assembly. None got through a chamber.

  • HSB 503 HSB 503
    88th General Assembly · Subcommittee recommends passage · similar
    Cleared committee

Matched by wording or an identical title.