09/29/2017

What’s the state of Ohio’s open records laws? My 2 cents

By Dennis Hetzel, President Executive Director

I recently was asked by an out-of-state reporter doing a story on Ohio’s open records laws how I viewed the “state of things.” For what it’s worth, here are my answers.

Q: Do you feel Ohio’s open records law is still effective or is watered down through exemptions being added? I believe that 32 exemptions have been added to the act.

 A: Ohio has a fundamentally sound public records law. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than many around the country in some significant aspects.  We also are encouraged by a number of recent appellate and Ohio Supreme Court decisions that affirm the presumptions of openness and transparency baked into the law.  

However, the ever-growing list of new exemptions is not only watering down our law but also making it more complicated to understand and administer. It is inevitable in any legislative session that there will be far more “ideas” to make more things secret versus proposals to keep records open.

 Q: is the Ohio News Media Association taking action to oppose this trend toward more exemptions?

 A: We carefully analyze every bill that’s introduced involving sunshine laws and decide whether to support or oppose. We work hard to have solid working relationships with legislators of both parties. If you aren’t at the table, you can’t win. You want legislators to at least ask the question, “What does the ONMA think?” before introducing any bills involving sunshine laws, and that usually happens – though not always.

We have been able to stop some really bad bills and often can get some type of improvement in proposals for new exemptions. Our most notable recent success came in the last session when Ohio finally created a low-cost, easy-to-use appeals process for citizens denied access to public records. This was thanks to the leadership of the GOP Senate President, Keith Faber, with our support. 

The larger challenge faced by FOI groups everywhere is that while it sounds good to seek a broad reform to reduce exemptions and improve your state’s open records law, this is a Pandora’s Box. There is a real danger any state’s law would get worse in an environment as toxic as today’s. Unfortunately, the First Amendment simply is not held in anywhere near the amount of respect that the Second Amendment seems to receive these days.

Q: Why do you think Ohio lawmakers chipping away at the law?

A:  Standing back from my advocacy, I fully appreciate that the 7-24 digital world, technology and the increased invasions of people’s privacy desires are serious issues that raise new challenges for open government advocates. However, we will pay a heavy price if the answer is to let the government keep more things secret just because someone is annoyed or inconvenienced, or wants something secret without serious debate whether the desire for secrecy really outweighs the need for accessibility and accountability.

 Q: Do you hear complaints about the act from members of your organization?

 A:  We do. It’s very frustrating for working journalists to run into more resistance, and it makes it harder to report the “real news” when you can’t get access to information. The new appeals process should help in that the most egregious denials can get tossed faster. The very fact that the process exists should encourage more governmental bodies to cooperate, because they know they will lose.  But, again, the more exemptions that are added, the more reasons public officials have been handed to say “no.”

For the foreseeable future, I believe our best course is to stay vigilant, try to get more citizens on our side and battle each of these new exemptions case-by-case.

Legislative Update: Bills on open records, free speech

With the above in mind, you won’t be surprised to learn that a number of bills have been introduced or changed recently involving open records or open meetings.  I count 19 bills we are watching that relate to sunshine law issues. The major items:

School-bus accidents: We continue to argue against House Bill 8, which is now in the Senate after passing the House. It would block access to the names of minors in school-bus accident reports – which are clearly open records. This week, a Senate committee added a new amendment that greatly concerns us. It could expand the application of HIPAA (health information) provisions to block access to more public record information. This bill is our highest priority at the moment.

Data Ohio: Good news with this one. House Bill 3 is finally starting to move. It would help journalists in a variety of ways by getting more public record information online in standard formats that would make data easier to analyze.

Mugshot sites: We signed off on HB 6, now on Gov. Kasich's desk, that would stop the practice of the so-called “mugshot websites” of charging people for the removal of public records. The language does not interfere with your access and usage of public records such as booking photos.

Campus free speech: HB 363 is not an ONMA issue, but it should be of great interest. This bill, from the conservative side of the Ohio House, requires state universities to do more to allow freedom of speech and assembly amid all the complaints from the right that political correctness is suppressing conservative views on many campuses. It also makes payment of student activity fees voluntary.

Body-worn cameras: We anticipate a bill soon that deals with a number of public records issue raised by the usage of body cameras. ONMA has made it a priority for more than two years to be part of these discussions.  While the bill will not be 100 percent to our liking, we are hopeful the bill will be a vast improvement over what a number of states have done to restrict access or make release voluntary at police discretion. Stay tuned.