July 4, 2026, marked the 250th anniversary of the United States of America.
Public Notice
Like many aspects of America’s legal system, the nation’s public notice requirements trace their roots to the British tradition of publishing official government actions for public inspection. During the colonial era, state and territorial governments relied on newspapers to publish legal notices, legislative actions, court proceedings, and other official information intended for the public. When the new federal government was established, it continued this well-established practice. In 1789, the Acts of the First Session of the First U.S. Congress directed the Secretary of State to publish all “bills, orders, resolutions and congressional votes” in at least three publicly available newspapers.
The newspapers selected to carry these official notices reflected the vibrant and often fiercely partisan press of the era. Many openly identified with political movements through their very names, including publications such as the Federal Gazette, the Gazette of the United States (which supported the Federalists), the National Gazette (aligned with the emerging Democratic-Republicans), the Aurora General Advertiser, and later the Democratic Press. Readers understood that these newspapers often expressed strong political viewpoints and editorial opinions.
Yet despite these partisan affiliations, governments at every level entrusted newspapers with the responsibility of publishing official notices because they provided the broadest and most reliable means of informing the public. The credibility of a public notice did not depend on the editorial viewpoint of the newspaper in which it appeared; rather, it depended on publication by an independent third party that created a permanent, public record available for anyone to inspect.
That principle has endured for more than two centuries. While the news industry has evolved dramatically, the fundamental purpose of public notice remains unchanged: to ensure transparency by placing important government information in a publicly accessible, independent forum where citizens can monitor the actions of their government.
Public Notice Works Best When It Reaches Everyone
By Public Notice Resource Center
For generations, newspapers have served as the trusted home for public notices because they provide something government-controlled websites cannot: independent, reliable, and permanent public access to important information. That commitment remains as important today as ever.
But today’s readers consume information in more ways than ever before. Some pick up the printed newspaper every week. Others visit their local newspaper’s website every day. The strongest public notice systems recognize this reality by embracing an omnichannel approach that combines the enduring value of print with the accessibility and convenience of digital publication.
Including a robust digital component alongside printed notices doesn’t diminish the importance of print—it strengthens it. Together, print and digital ensure that public notices are available to the broadest possible audience, increasing transparency and helping citizens find information when and how they need it.
Just as newspapers have long followed best practices for presenting notices in print, digital publication deserves the same attention. Public notices should be easy to locate on a newspaper’s website, displayed prominently rather than buried within menus, and never hidden behind a paywall or metered access. Searchable, accessible, and consistently updated notice pages make it easier for the public to engage with their local governments while reinforcing newspapers’ commitment to public service.
When lawmakers debate where public notices belong, the conversation should not focus solely on the value of ink on paper. It should focus on the unparalleled reach newspapers provide. No other platform delivers the combination of trusted print distribution, broad digital access, independent oversight, professional archiving, and local accountability that newspapers offer.
This comprehensive approach is precisely what makes newspapers uniquely qualified to continue serving as the official publisher of public notices. By reaching readers both online and offline, newspapers ensure that government actions are visible to everyone—not just those who know where to look on a government website.
As the public notice landscape continues to evolve, our message should evolve as well. We are not simply defending a print tradition. We are championing a proven system that delivers transparency across every platform where citizens seek information. That is the future of public notice—and it is one that newspapers are uniquely positioned to provide.
Undelivered: How Hernando County is Failing Taxpayers on Public Notices and Violating State Law
By Rocco Maglio June 19, 2026
Above: A screenshot of legal notices from the Hernando Sun website
Since March 12, 2026, Hernando County and its vendor, Column, have failed to meet the legal requirements for distributing public notices via first-class mail. We start with March 12 because it took three months and dozens of outreach attempts to receive the mailed notices.
Of the 75 notices published on the website during this period, only 17 were received by mail. Two of these could not be read because the mailing label was over the notice. Critically, only 9 or 12% of these notices reached the recipient before the scheduled meetings took place. This failure effectively disenfranchises residents who rely on physical mail, violating Florida’s public notice statutes and exposing the County to significant legal and financial risk.
The mailed notices fill a need for the people who do not feel comfortable online or cannot afford Internet access.
Recently, a resident of an affordable housing community reached out to the newspaper after being unable to sign up to receive public notices by mail, which the county, by law, is required to provide.
She was told that the county had received only two requests to receive mailed legal notices. The Hernando Sun has delivered dozens of requests to the county from individuals wishing to receive notices by mail. We did not mail them so that the county could not claim that they were lost in the mail. The resident was told to email her request and they would sign her up for notices, which sounds like they were trying to sign her up to receive emailed links to the notices online. She wants the notices via mail so she does not have to hunt them down and she knows that the notices have not been changed. She mentioned that it was nice when they were in the newspaper because she could easily find them and knew they would not change.
Background: Fiscal Mismanagement and Misinformation
The transition to digital-first notification began in October 2025, following a commission meeting where county staff presented inflated cost projections for public notices. These figures erroneously included other advertising costs, more than doubling the actual amount spent on legal notices.
Under Florida law, a municipality may only move notices to a government website if it results in documented cost savings. The current data demonstrates a significant financial loss:
Website Publication Cost to County (Feb. – May, 2026): $16,000
Equivalent Newspaper Publication Cost (Hernando Sun): < $3,500 Net Loss to Taxpayers: $12,500 While the County pays a 350% premium for this digital service, the reach has diminished from the thousands of copies distributed by the Hernando Sun to a select few mailed notices that often arrive after the fact.
Statutory Violations Regarding Resident Notification
Florida law requires municipalities that host notices online to maintain a registry of residents and property owners who wish to receive notices via first-class mail. Hernando County has consistently failed to adhere to these requirements:
Lack of Transparency: The County provided no public instructions on how to join the registry. It required weeks of inquiry and a physically delivered, signed request to even be considered for the mailing list.
Vendor Obstruction: The County’s vendor, Column, initially claimed that registered mailing was not a legal requirement, even though we only requested that we receive the notices by first-class mail. They only agreed to comply after multiple challenges regarding the specific language of the statute.
Untimely Delivery: Agreement to mail notices has not resulted in compliance. With less than an eighth of notices arriving before the meetings they advertise, the County is failing its fundamental duty to provide “timely and due notice” to its citizens. The vendor is only mailing notices in a single envelope every couple of weeks to reduce cost. Rather than requiring the notices to be provided early enough to arrive by the publication date, they mail them without accounting for delivery time. This makes it easier on the county staff since the newspaper requires the notice to be delivered by Tuesday each week for Friday publication. The county staff is able to produce the notices a week and a half later because the vendor is not accounting for printing and mailing time. Additionally, the vendor appears to be mailing from Oregon, which adds additional mailing time.
No Due Care: The number of notices that are missed and mailing notices covered with a mailing label shows that this duty to the public is not being taken seriously. At the Hernando Sun, every Friday, we verify that notices were printed in the newspaper, are on our site, and appear on FloridaPublicNotices.com.
Legal and Financial Consequences
Improper public notification is not merely an administrative error; it is a procedural defect that can invalidate Commission actions. If a public notice is found to be deficient, all subsequent actions—including land transfers, zoning changes, or budget approvals—may be “unwound” and required to be repeated.
The financial stakes are high:
Legal Fees: Challenging and defending improper notices creates unnecessary litigation costs.
Precedent: In a recent challenge, Miami Dade College estimated that a single improperly noticed land transfer resulted in an estimated $300,000 loss. These additional costs will be borne by taxpayers.
Additional government entities: Hernando County is also publishing notices for other government entities. Not following the public notice law puts both entities at risk.
Hernando County is currently operating in violation of state law by failing to provide cost-effective notification and neglecting the statutory rights of residents to receive timely mailings. They are ignoring many written requests to be mailed notices that were dropped off at the county administration office in accordance with state law. The county has failed to provide public notice and needs to cease providing incomplete public notice.
The text of this legal notice received on June 3, 2026, is largely obscured by the printing of the mailing label.
Fremont County Library board sorting out its public notice gaffe
Marit Gookin Riverton Ranger/WyoToday Media Jun 10, 2026
LANDER — A director on vacation, a board still waiting on a legal opinion and a short-notice meeting about a contentious policy change: The changes to the Fremont County Library Board’s material acquisitions policy did not exactly follow the typical procedure.
And the ways in which it went about kicking off the public comment period for those changes raise further questions — especially when it comes to the issues of transparency of public participation in government.
“I did once again want to weigh in on the oversteps of what I perceive to be ethically, if not legally, concerning timing and actions that this board is continuing to take regarding your proposed material acquisitions policy,” Karen Wardner of Riverton told the board during public comment June 3.
After meeting on about 24 hours’ notice, just days after Library Director Anita Marple left on vacation, the board voted 3-2 to pass its heavily debated — if ultimately unanimously OK’ed for attorney review — changes to the material acquisitions policy and send it out for public comment.
Public comment was not allowed at the special meeting; the policy’s comment period was stated to start two days before the public could even access the policy to review it online, and three days before any notice about the comment period was printed in the newspaper.
“Public business needs to be conducted in the public square — for transparency, accountability and equal access — and printed public notices are the gold standard. They cannot be altered or hidden. They’re permanent,” Wyoming Press Association Executive Director Steve Kiggins remarked.
“The question becomes,” board member Julie Lefevre said during the board’s June regular meeting in Dubois June 3, “when was the public comment period begun?”
On June 3, the board voted to retroactively change the public comment period’s start date to May 15, the date the public could actually access the proposed revisions — but still before an official notice had been printed in the county newspaper of record.
Director on vacation
When Marple left for vacation in mid-May, nothing of note was scheduled to happen in her absence. But soon after she left, on May 12, the Fremont County Library Board held a special meeting on short notice.
The morning of May 12, Marple sent the board an email recommending it wait for legal review, her director’s report explains.
The board continued with the special meeting, voting 3-2 to send its draft material acquisitions policy out for public comment. Board chair Kristen McClelland’s stated reason for doing so was that she wanted to see it passed before the board’s composition changes on July 1 as it had been difficult to reach consensus on the policy.
McClelland said that she would take care of ensuring the policy was properly noticed and put out for comment, and that there would be no need to disrupt Marple’s vacation.
According to Marple, and confirmed by McClelland at the June 3 library board meeting, McClelland did so by emailing the Lander Library branch manager about posting documents and notifications; McClelland said that she felt that since Lander is the main county library, this was the logical person to contact in Marple’s absence.
Marple was copied on McClelland’s email and the branch manager forwarded the items to her, as, Marple wrote, formatting documents and putting them out for public review is her responsibility.
“The first opportunity I reasonably had to properly format documents was late afternoon on Friday, May 15. On that day I was in Pensacola, Florida, celebrating my son’s Air Force wing-pinning ceremony,” Marple explained. Even so, she worked over phone and email with staff, and the proposed policy changes were made available to the public by about 5 p.m. that day.
A request for a public notice was sent to the Lander Journal by McClelland on May 13. Marple noted in her report that extra payment was made to County10 for the publication of the notice.
No legal opinion
During the board’s May 12 special meeting, board chair McClelland said that she wanted to move forward with passing the proposed policy without waiting on a legal opinion because she hadn’t heard back from the county attorney.
But this, Library Director Marple contended, was contradicted by an April 30 email from Deputy County Attorney Nathan Maxon stating that “I let Kristen know that I would not be rushing my analysis since a legal challenge is a possibility … Maybe next week.”
It is possible that McClelland was referring to not having heard back from Maxon within that “next week” timeframe. However, that distinction was not made during the special meeting.
Additionally, during the special meeting, board member Marta Mossburg said that she feels that the fact that Maxon had yet to return a legal opinion was “de facto denying the board” its right to decide policies as a governing body. In her director’s report, Marple characterized Mossburg’s comment as “clear disrespect to the county attorney.”
Marple further noted that during the May 12 county commission meeting, Commissioner Mike Jones “expressed concern about the legal issues with this policy” and emphasized the importance of legal review in order to be aware of any risk of lawsuits.
A question of public participation
Can a public comment period start before members of the public can access the document they can comment on? Can it start before the public could reasonably be aware of it?
During the board’s June regular meeting, McClelland repeatedly asserted that the notice had been sent to the “papers of record,” County10 and WyoToday Media, and so the proper procedure had been followed.
But Wyoming state statute is clear: The term “newspaper of record” refers to a print publication, and the earliest date the notice of the public comment period for the material acquisitions policy could have been published in a print newspaper was May 16.
“Wyomingites expect, and value, public notices in their local newspaper. A whopping 83% of Wyoming adults believe public notices should be required to be published in the newspaper on a regular basis as a community service, according to the WPA’s 2026 statewide study from Coda Ventures,” Kiggins noted. “There’s not a suitable substitute. Newspapers are simply the most reliable and most transparent option.”
Even if the county’s requirement for public notices to be published in a newspaper of record does not apply to the library board, as of midday on Friday, the policy was still not available to the public on the county library’s website. Despite this, the announcement stated that the public comment period started from May 13.
According to McClelland, a public comment period may start from when a public notice is submitted, not from the date it’s printed; it’s possible that this is referencing either the requirements in the Wyoming administrative rules for state agencies, which allow for public comment periods to start from when the Wyoming Secretary of State’s office is notified, or the requirements for meeting notices.
None of the other board members appeared to dispute this assertion, and Wetzel stated that this has been standard practice for the library in the past.
“I just really don’t understand why we have to change what we normally do,” Wetzel commented. “We don’t wait till the newspaper has been published; we never have.”
As of press time Friday, County Clerk Julie Freese had not responded to questions about the guidance the county provides its appointed boards about the appropriate procedures to follow for public notice.
Marple recommended that the board change the public comment period’s start date to reflect when the public could access the proposed changes, noting that the board would still have time to call a special meeting and vote before the new board appointments on July 1. Lefevre moved to change the public comment period’s start date to May 15; after a brief discussion about whether May 16, when the notice was published in the newspaper, would be more appropriate, it was ultimately decided to keep the date of May 15.
McClelland seconded Lefevre’s motion, and the board voted 3-1 to change the start date of the comment period to May 15; Wetzel voted against changing the date, and board member Perry Cook was absent.
Marple noted that this is all dependent on Maxon’s legal review coming back without any recommended changes, as a change to the policy will mean that the board will have to start the public comment period over again.
The board tentatively planned to hold a special meeting to cast its final vote on the policy change on May 30; McClelland stated that she would email the other board members to choose a time.
https://www.wyomingnews.com/laramieboomerang/news/fremont-county-library-board-sorting-out-its-public-notice-gaffe/article_abb7dad5-c8eb-4e23-a462-e311bad38f7a.html
If you have a public notice story
or a bill that may be of interest.
Please send information to
Jim Tarrant at jim@pnrc.net.
CALIFORNIA
AB2323 Publication: newspapers of general circulation.
This bill requires that any public notice legally mandated to be published in a “newspaper of general circulation” – meaning a newspaper that is regularly published, has a paying subscriber base, and is printed in the area where the notice is relevant – must now also be published on the newspaper’s internet website or electronic version available online, in addition to its print edition. Furthermore, newspapers are prohibited from charging extra fees for accessing these public notices online or for posting them to their websites, though they can still charge for other content. The bill also clarifies that minor errors or temporary technical issues with the online publication of a legal notice will not invalidate the notice if it is correctly published in the print version and meets all other legal requirements.
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
NEW JERSEY
A5182 Allows public bodies to provide required notices to newspapers distributed online and establishes related publication requirements; establishes rates that newspapers and online news publications may charge for each notice posted online.
This bill allows public bodies to satisfy their requirement to provide advance notice of meetings by publishing notices in newspapers that are also available online or on online news publications, and it expands the definition of “newspaper” to include these digital formats for all official notices and advertisements. It introduces new terms like “designated publication address” and “original, general news content” to define what qualifies as a legitimate news source for these publications. The bill also establishes specific criteria for online news publications to be considered qualified for publishing official advertising, including requirements for original news content, paid subscriptions, and maintaining a physical address. Furthermore, it sets new rates for charging for official advertising based on the number of paid subscribers, shifting from a per-line to a per-character basis for text-only notices and establishing per-square-inch rates for tabular or pre-built advertisements, with provisions for annual adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index. Finally, it clarifies that municipalities, except for cities, must publish official advertisements in qualified newspapers or online news publications that regularly cover the municipality, with specific fallback options if no such publication meets the primary criteria.
Introduced. Referred to Assembly State and Local Government Committee.
ARIZONA
SB 1167 cities; towns; counties; posting; website
Purpose Allows a city, town or county to satisfy any statutory requirements for advertising, publishing or printing by posting the public notice on the official website of the city, town or county.
Background Statute outlines circumstances when the governing board of a city, town or county board of supervisors (county BOS) must contract with a newspaper for the publication of public notices. These circumstances include but are not limited to: 1) notices of election; 2) invitations for bids; 3) notices of letting contracts; 4) laws and ordinances; 5) notices of zoning; and 6) notices of proposed city charters. A county BOS must contract for all advertising, publications and printing required to be done or made by all departments of county government (A.R.S. §§ 9-812 and 11-251).
When publication of a notice in a newspaper is directed or authorized by law, the publication must be in the newspaper of general circulation. If the place of publication of the notice is not specified, publication must be in a newspaper printed and published within: 1) the county where the state capital is located, if the notice is from a state office, board or commission; 2) the county, if the notice is from a county officer, board or commission or any person in the county; or 3) the territorial limits, if the notice is from the district, city or town officer, board, commission, or by any person in the district, city or town (A.R.S. § 39-204).
There is no anticipated fiscal impact to the state General Fund associated with this legislation.
Provisions:
- Allows a city, town or county to satisfy any statutory requirement for advertising, publishing or printing by posting the public notice on the official website of the city, town or county.
- Requires a city, town or county that posts public notices on the official website to include a public notices link on the home page of the website that links to all statutorily required public notices listed by category.
- Specifies that the ability to satisfy the statutory requirement to print public notices as outlined does not apply to a notice of a proposed city charter.
- Becomes effective on the general effective date.
Signed by Governor