A proposal to remove the state’s requirement for government agencies to place public notices in newspapers has passed the Arizona legislature, apparently splitting legislators along party lines.

Senate Bill 1006, introduced by Sen. John Kavanagh (Republican, 3rd District), allows local governments to publish their own election notices, invitations to bid, contracts, laws, and ordinances on city websites. I’m proposing. , rather than the newspapers that are currently needed.

Before the bill passed the Senate on March 6, the bill was amended to provide that only local governments in counties with a population greater than 4 million can choose to publish on their own website. . In Arizona, only Maricopa County meets the population threshold.

Kavanagh said the fix came after concerns were raised that internet services in some rural areas were unreliable and information may not be available to all. That’s it.

SB1006 passed the House Committee on Wednesday in a tough 5-4 partisan vote. All five of his Republican representatives on the committee, including local councilor John Gillette (R-Kingman), supported the proposal, and all four of his Democrats on the committee voted against it.

On March 6, the state Senate passed the bill by a majority of 16-13-1. In that vote, 15 of 16 Republican senators supported the bill, including local Senator Sonny Borrelli (R-Lake Havasu City), while 14 Democratic senators supported the bill. Twelve of them objected. Senator Ken Bennett (Republican 1st District) was the only Republican in the Senate to oppose the bill, while Senator Brian Fernandez (23rd District) was the only Democrat to support the bill. Senator Sally Ann Gonzalez (District D 20) did not vote.

“In our new digital world, as print newspapers gradually disappear, it becomes more and more a waste of taxpayer money, and local governments demand that they be published in paper newspapers to contact people. There are more and more inappropriate ways of doing things,” said Kavanagh. He told the House Government Committee on Wednesday. “Especially since it is not a requirement for local governments to actually place notices in the newspapers in their town. They can choose any number of newspapers in their county.”

Kavanagh also claimed that this kind of advertisement was of little interest to “ordinary people” and said he would not read newspaper advertisements verbatim.

“Your voters don’t know how to find these things in these newspapers. Why would they want to?” Kavanagh asked. “We’re talking about election notices. You’ll get emails from recorders when elections are approaching. Reading the newspaper will give you a pretty good idea of ​​when the elections will take place. Bid invitations – voters will We are not bidding and if they are the company that does the bidding they will hire a professional company to tally this contract notice – I could go on and on and on.This is what people want to do It doesn’t matter.”

In explaining her opposition to the bill, former journalist Rep. Jennifer Longdon (District 5D) said it was important to ensure that advertisements continue to be issued by independent third parties such as newspapers. I said that I feel there is.

“For as long as newspapers have existed, they have tormented the comfortable and comforted the afflicted,” said Longdon. “I think it is important to keep historical records and make them available for context and understanding. It may not matter at the moment, but for the story 10, 15, or 50 years from now, how the road was developed or how decisions about annexation were made. or the awarding of water contracts.I think it is very important to maintain this record independently and indefinitely.”

Rep. May Pashurakai also voted against the bill on the committee, saying many voters do not have access to computers or mobile phones and rely on newspapers to sustain their daily lives.

Lisa Simpson, executive director of the Arizona Newspaper Association, spoke against the bull at a committee hearing. She said it would undermine some “important elements” of the notice, including the facts. He said he had hard and digital copies of the notice so he could prove that it had not changed since it was first posted. She also noted that all newspapers post digital notices in front of their website paywalls.

“It’s easy to go back and see what was published 20 years ago, and you can access them,” says Simpson. “Newspapers are available in every city and town across the country. It is often said that print is in decline, but newspapers are evolving. Papers may not have as many subscribers as they once did, but We have evolved into the digital age. Every newspaper has digital subscribers.”

Rich Macke, president of River City Newspapers, which also publishes Today’s News-Herald, voiced his opposition to the bill at a committee meeting on Wednesday. I’m quoting the article from hidden-brain.simplecast.com under the heading “Starve the Watchdogs: When the Newspapers Disappear, Who Will Bill the Bill?” Macke said the cost for local governments to obtain loans from banks has actually increased in areas where similar laws have been passed.

“Lenders have started to realize that lending to local governments is a little bit riskier if there is no third party to monitor the government,” he said.

Macke also noted that because newspapers routinely have a larger digital footprint than city websites, advertisements placed in newspapers will be seen by more people. averages about 1.5 million monthly page views on havasunews.com, while Lake Havasu City receives less than 100,000 monthly page views on lhcaz.gov.

John Cortis, former executive director of the Yuma Chamber of Commerce, also urged the committee to vote against the bill.

“You have told voters that transparency in government is important, and we want more transparency between government and citizens,” Cortis said. “This bill does the exact opposite. It is now being distributed both in print and online, forcing people to seek the truth.”

Cortis also said the bill would allow local governments to grow at the expense of private organizations.

But Goodyear City Hall’s D’Arcy McCracken argued that the bill was meant to increase transparency, not undermine it. Instead of simply searching everything on Google.

“That’s how most people get their information right now,” McCracken said. “We are looking at increasing transparency. No one is more convinced than city officials that transparency is in the best interest of our residents. I want people to hear me out about how things are going, and I want them to get notifications and information so they know when the meeting will be held.

SB1006 is also scheduled for review by the House Rules Committee. If the bill passes the House, where the Republicans hold his 31-29 majority, it will go to the governor’s office for signature and become law. However, it is not clear if Gov. Katie Hobbs will sign the bill into law. She has previously said she will not sign legislation that does not have bipartisan support.