Estimated read time: 1-2 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — After debate over a bill that would loosen requirements that legal notices be published in local newspapers turned into a debate about its impact on small-town newspapers, the bill was narrowly voted down in the Utah House Monday.
Rep. Kim Coleman, R-West Jordan, sponsored the bill, HB69, arguing legal notices can be costly and ineffective, especially if legal parties can be individually notified rather than through a newspaper.
She argued entities that are required to post legal notices shouldn't be required by law to pay for the advertising "real estate" in newspapers if they are able to notify impacted parties in person or by certified mail.
The law would not impact public notices, only legal notices.
But Rep. Merrill Nelson, R-Grantsville, spoke against the bill, arguing that "small-town" local newspapers rely on notice revenue.
"This is an unnecessary provision that appears to do more harm than good, especially to the small rural communities who are affected by and really live by their local newspapers," Nelson said.
He also said the bill appeared "to be a first step in an effort to remove all publication notices" — something he said lawmakers should resist.
"We look at the legal notice section because those are notices of public interest to everyone in the community, not just a handpicked few," he said.
A narrow majority of House lawmakers didn't like Coleman's bill. It was shot down with a 35-39 vote.
