By attorney Dustin Coffman
The Iowa Legislature has enacted House File 2490 (“HF 2490”), a bill making several significant changes to Iowa’s Open Meetings and Open Records laws. HF 2490 amends Iowa Code chapters 21 and 22 by modifying public meeting notice requirements, expanding the categories of employment-related information subject to disclosure, and creating a new judicial procedure permitting governmental bodies to seek injunctions against certain “vexatious” public records requesters. The bill was signed by the Governor on May 15, 2026, and will go into effect on July 1, 2026.
I. Changes to Open Meetings Notice Requirements
HF 2490 modifies Iowa Code section 21.4 relating to public meeting notice requirements. Public notices for open meetings must now be posted:
1. In a prominent and conspicuous place that is annually designated for such purposes by the governmental body, in a manner such that the notice is visible at all times; and
2. On the primary internet site owned or maintained and regularly updated by the governmental body, or on another primary internet presence moderated by the governmental body.
Notice to news media that have requested notice continues to be required.
An agenda that had been previously posted may be amended by posting a revised agenda not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting, marked with the word “AMENDED,” and identifying the amended provisions. The government body must provide notice of the amended agenda in the same manner required for the original agenda, discussed above.
II. New Public Disclosure Requirements for Employment Separation and Severance Information
HF 2490 expands the categories of employment-related information available as public records under Iowa Code section 22.7(11)(a). The bill clarifies that certain separation-related information is subject to disclosure, including the last date an employee, contractor, or appointee performed work or actively carried out essential job functions. This information is public regardless of whether it appears in a written document, contract, agreement, or other arrangement.
HF 2490 also makes clear that amounts paid or benefits provided in connection with an individual’s departure from public service are subject to disclosure. This includes continuation of pay, severance, and other compensation or benefits exceeding amounts owed for work performed before the individual’s final day of service. As with last-day-worked information, these disclosure requirements apply regardless of whether the information is reflected in a written document, contract, agreement, or arrangement.
III. New “Vexatious Requester” Injunction Procedure
The bill also adds a new section, Iowa Code section 22.8A, which creates a cause of action for governmental bodies to seek relief against certain public records requesters alleged to be engaging in vexatious conduct.
Under the new provision, a district court may grant an injunction restraining a person’s right to examine public records from a specific governmental body or may impose reasonable limitations on the manner, frequency, or scope of requests. However, the bill establishes several conditions that must be satisfied before relief may be granted. The governmental body bears the burden of establishing entitlement to relief by clear and convincing evidence. The petition must be supported by affidavit, and the court must find, among other things, that:
1. the requests, viewed in their totality, would clearly not be in the public interest;
2. the requests constitute a pattern of vexatious conduct;
3. continued requests would substantially and irreparably injure the governmental body’s ability to perform its duties or functions; and
4. less restrictive measures available under Chapter 22 are inadequate to provide sufficient relief.
HF 2490 identifies factors a court may consider in determining whether conduct is vexatious, including the number, frequency, timing, scope, and content of requests; the nature of related communications; prior findings regarding the requester’s conduct; and other relevant circumstances. The statute further defines “vexatious conduct” and clarifies that a large volume of requests, standing alone, does not constitute vexatious conduct when made by a person or representative of the news media. In deciding these actions, courts must also consider Iowa’s policy favoring free and open examination of public records, even where requests may cause inconvenience or embarrassment to officials or others.
If a court finds that the respondent requester has not engaged in a pattern of vexatious conduct, the bill requires the court to enter an order against the governmental body for an award of costs and reasonable attorney fees, including appellate attorney fees, to the requester.
If you have questions about HF 2490 or its implications for your governmental body, please contact your local counsel or an attorney in the Ahlers & Cooney Government Law Practice Group.
About Ahlers & Cooney's Client Alerts
Our Client Alerts are intended to provide occasional general comments on new developments in Federal and State law and regulations which we believe might be of interest to our clients. The Client Alerts should not be considered opinions of Ahlers & Cooney, P.C., and are not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should not under any circumstance act upon the information in this publication without seeking specific professional counsel. Please note that AI tools may not accurately interpret or apply the legal information contained in this alert; reliance on such tools is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Ahlers & Cooney will be pleased to provide additional details regarding any article upon request. Additional copies of this Client Alert may be obtained by contacting any attorney in the Firm or by visiting the Firm's website at www.ahlerslaw.com.
©2026 Ahlers & Cooney, P.C. All Rights Reserved.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This disclosure is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa. Memberships and offices in legal fraternities and legal societies, technical and professional licenses, and memberships in scientific, technical and professional associations and societies of law or field of practice does not mean that a lawyer is a specialist or expert in a field of law, nor does it mean that such lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. This notice is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa.