Boise State University is denying wrongdoing in a public records dispute with a conservative lobbying group.
Attorneys for Boise State say the university “acted in good faith” in responding to the Idaho Family Policy Center — even though the group received only two pages of university records, at a cost of $257.02.
The IFPC filed a lawsuit on July 24, stemming from a seven-month records dispute. The Christian lobbying group requested documents, data and correspondence related to a 2025 article authored by two Boise State researchers. The article said 35% of OB-GYNs left Idaho between 2022 and 2024, in the wake of the state’s near-total ban on abortion.
The IFPC authored one of Idaho’s anti-abortion laws.
The lawsuit alleges Boise State dragged out its response to the request for more than a month, withheld germane documents and charged for a costly legal review of the records that ultimately were released.
“By refusing multiple requests for these documents, and rebuffing efforts to solve this matter without litigation, BSU has frivolously pursued its refusal,” the IFPC said in its lawsuit.
In a response filed Tuesday, Boise State said it produced all documents that fell within the parameters of the request and did not delay its response. The university also defended the bill that it sent to the IFPC — which reflected 6.5 hours of staff review, including 3 hours of legal work.
Idaho’s public records law is based in a presumption of openness. In other words, documents are considered public records unless they are specifically exempt from disclosure.
The dispute between Boise State and the IFPC centers on two intertwined issues.
The timing. The law requires public entities to release records to Idaho residents within three working days — although agencies can and frequently do claim an extension that pushes the timetable to 10 working days.
In this case, IFPC policy analyst Grace Howat filed a records request on Dec. 10. Boise State responded on Dec. 23, within 10 working days. The university did not produce the records at this time, but instead sent an estimate — reflecting the potential cost of reviewing and producing the records. Boise State did not request payment at this time.
On Jan. 8, Boise State sent a $257.02 invoice. IFPC paid the bill that day.
Howat twice sent followup emails, asking about the status of the records request. “Am I able to receive the records I requested and paid for?” she wrote on Jan. 26.
The university provided the two-page response on Jan. 27 — more than 10 working days after IFPC paid the invoice.
But in Boise State’s response in court, attorneys defended the turnaround time.
“(Boise State) denies (IFPC’s) characterization that (Boise State) ‘sat on the request for over a month.’”
Carsten Peterson and Eric Stokes are representing Boise State in the case. They work for Hawley Troxell, a Boise-based firm prominent in education law.
The invoice. Public agencies are required to cover some cost of retrieving records — their first two hours of staff time and the first 100 pages of paper records.
Beyond that, agencies are allowed to bill their costs, but they aren’t required to do so.
Boise State says the $257.02 invoice covers 6.5 hours of staff review, above the two “free” hours of employee time.
IFPC is skeptical, noting that the two pages released by Boise State were unredacted.
In their response, Boise State’s attorneys say that staff had to review documents beyond the two pages that were released. “(Boise State) denies the inference that 6 1/2 hours responding to Ms. Howat’s request was excessive.”
What’s next? It’s unclear when the dispute may go to court.
Both sides are seeking their costs and attorney’s fees. IFPC is also seeking the $257.02 in question, or a cost to be determined at trial. The group also wants a court order requiring Boise State to “produce the records requested, or to show cause why it has not done so.”
In its filing, Boise State’s attorneys also argue that the burden of proof falls not on the university, but on IFPC.
