Need to monitor. Companion is SB 1487 by Bettencourt

Donnis: On its face, it appears to be simply a measure to give individual taxpayers a right to choose electronic communications with the tax office rather than written communication. I wonder, though, if the wording is loose enough to encourage a rogue tax official to maintain that it provides cover for using e-notices rather than public notices in a newspaper. Reid's response: I see your concern here, but I think it would be very difficult to argue that public notice falls under these provisions. The bill defines “communication” as something “required or permitted to be delivered” to a property owner. That “delivered” language appears several times throughout the bill. I suppose a rogue official could argue that a newspaper (containing public notices) gets delivered, but I think that would be a real stretch, since public notice is typically discussed in the context of publication, not delivery. And certainly not in the context of delivery to an individual, who could choose to receive that delivery electronically.