Secrecy and Open Government: What Idaho Law Makes Public

Data center developers want quiet. They are bidding against other sites, they don't want land prices to jump, and they don't want competitors reading their expansion plans in the local paper. Residents want to know who is coming, how much power and water it needs, and what their officials promised. Idaho's public records and open meeting laws decide where that line sits, and the line is clearer than most people think.

The secrecy and process lesson in the impacts module covered code names, tracing LLCs, Idaho's response deadlines and executive session rules. This lesson looks closely at which records are public, which exemptions agencies cite, and when confidentiality agreements cross a line.

The starting rule

Idaho Code 74-102 says there is a presumption that all public records in Idaho are open at all reasonable times for inspection, except as otherwise expressly provided by statute.

• The agency carries the burden. It has to point to a statute that exempts the record.
• A contract cannot create an exemption. An NDA signed by a county employee is a promise between the county and the developer. It does not amend Title 74.
• A custodian generally may not question why you want the record. The statute limits inquiries to identity, mailing-list restrictions and protecting personal information as the law requires.

The exemptions that come up

Trade secrets, 74-107(1). The statute exempts trade secrets, including those in responses to requests for proposals, and defines a trade secret as information that gets independent economic value from not being generally known and is the subject of reasonable efforts to keep it secret. A server floor plan or a proprietary cooling design can qualify. The fact that a company wants 300 MW, the parcel it bought, or the tax break it asked for is harder to fit, especially once those facts appear in a public filing elsewhere.

Economic development records, 74-107(6). This is the broad one. It exempts records gathered by a local agency or the Idaho Department of Commerce "for the specific purpose of assisting a person to locate, maintain, invest in, or expand business operations" in Idaho. Early prospect files, site tours and incentive inquiries handled by an economic development office fall squarely in it. But the words "specific purpose" matter. A rezone application, a staff report, a hearing packet, a recorded development agreement and a county commission's own deliberations are created for other purposes.

Port districts, 74-107(8). Financial statements and business information submitted to a port district with a development proposal or financing application are exempt. Relevant only where a port district is involved.

Executive sessions follow the same logic. Idaho Code 74-206(1)(d) allows closed discussion of records exempt from disclosure, and 63-602NN specifically lets a county board consider trade secrets in executive session when weighing a property tax exemption. No final action can be taken in executive session, and the vote on the exemption is public.

Sorting a real project file

Records held by state agencies follow the same law. The utility's special contract application at the PUC is public, though parties can file trade secret material under seal and post a redacted version. A DEQ air permit application is public, including engine counts and modeled emissions. Water right applications and transfers at IDWR are published by law. Taxpayer filings with the Tax Commission are generally confidential, so whether a company has certified for the sales tax exemption may only come from the company.

Deadlines, counted correctly

Idaho Code 74-103 gives an agency three working days to grant or deny a resident's request, extendable to 10 working days with written notice. No response in time counts as a denial. Working days skip weekends and legal holidays.

When confidentiality agreements become a problem

Confidential site scouting is routine in industry, and a staff-level NDA during the scouting phase is not a scandal. The trouble starts when the agreement reaches past scouting into the public decision.

Routine	Problem
Signed by economic development staff	Signed by the elected officials who will vote on the rezone or incentive
Expires when a public application is filed	Runs through the hearing and vote, or has no end date
Covers proprietary technical details	Covers the end user's identity, power and water needs, or incentive terms
Contains a carve-out for public records law	Purports to bar release of any record, chilling staff even where the law requires release
A short list of named signers	Blankets an entire agency

That last row is not hypothetical. In Arizona, Pima County Supervisor Matt Heinz told KOLD in July 2025 that the county's NDA for the project known as Project Blue, signed by its procurement director, covered all 7,000 county employees and the five supervisors. FAS, reviewing data center community benefit agreements in 2026, found that negotiations often happen under NDAs with little room for public input.

The core problem with NDAs on decision-makers is simple. A rezone or special use permit is supposed to be decided on a record the public can see and answer. If commissioners know who the customer is, how many megawatts it wants, or what side deal is on the table, and the public doesn't, then the hearing is testimony to a board that already knows things nobody in the room can test.