WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1380

Providing funding for the recruitment, retention, and support of law enforcement officers.

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Andrew Barkis and 10 co-sponsors

HB 1380 lets county boards publish full proceedings on the county website (within 7 days) instead of only in the official newspaper; retains affidavit rule for newspaper pubs.

By resolution, reintroduced and retained in present status.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1380

HB 1380 — North Dakota (2025)

Amend and reenact NDCC §11‑11‑37 — Publication of board of county commissioners’ proceedings

Purpose / Intent

The bill would update how county boards of commissioners publish their official proceedings by explicitly allowing counties to publish meeting reports on the county’s official website as an alternative to (or in addition to) publishing in the county’s official newspaper. The intent is to modernize public notice practices and provide an electronic publication option for posting the board’s proceedings.

Key provisions

  • Statutory change: amends and reenacts section 11‑11‑37 of the North Dakota Century Code.
  • Publication options: requires the board of county commissioners to either
    • supply a full and complete report of its official proceedings to the county’s official newspaper, or
    • publish that full and complete report on the county’s official website.
  • Timing: the report must be provided/published no later than seven days after the meeting at which the report is read and approved.
  • Newspaper requirement retained: if the county uses the official newspaper, the publisher must run the report in the issue immediately following receipt and must file an affidavit of publication with the county auditor in the proper form.
  • Text note: the bill text contains a minor typographical merging (“TheIf …”) but the intended effect is clear — to preserve the existing affidavit requirement for newspaper publication while adding a website publication option.

Who would be affected

  • County boards of commissioners — would have the option (or obligation, depending on county practice) to post proceedings to the county website.
  • County auditors — continue to receive affidavits from newspapers and may become responsible for records associated with website publication.
  • Official county newspapers — could see reduced mandatory circulation of proceedings if counties shift to website publication; newspapers remain subject to the affidavit requirement when used.
  • County residents and the general public — potentially greater and quicker online access to meeting proceedings; impacts vary depending on internet access/digital divide.
  • Legal users of public records and entities that rely on formal proof of publication (affidavits) — practices for proof differ between newspaper affidavits and website posting.

Procedural / timeline aspects

  • Introduced: November 18, 2024.
  • Reported/considered in the Legislature; on second reading the bill failed to pass (vote: yeas 13, nays 80). (Legislative calendar entry: second reading, failed to pass.)
  • Because it failed second reading, the measure did not advance to enactment during that session. It could be reintroduced in a future session or considered again subject to legislative procedures.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Transparency/access: website publication can improve speed and public access to proceedings for those with internet access.
  • Cost and fiscal: could reduce costs tied to paid newspaper publication for some counties, though no fiscal estimate is provided in the bill text.
  • Legal/archival questions: differences between print affidavits and web postings raise issues about evidentiary proof, long‑term archiving, accessibility for residents without reliable internet, and standards for what constitutes the “official” website posting (timestamping, preservation, notice procedures).
  • Implementation: counties choosing website publication may need clear local policies (where on the site items are posted, retention policy, notice that posting satisfies statutory requirement) to avoid disputes.

If you want, I can:
- Draft suggested statutory language to tighten archival/affidavit/verification procedures for website publication; or
- Prepare a short memo comparing the bill’s language to current NDCC §11‑11‑37 and to practices in other states.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.