Proposed Law Riddled with Misguided Symbolism

A great editorial from The Seattle Times on the misguided symbolism of a proposed law that would exempt personal information on law-enforcement employee's from the state's Public Disclosure Act. The proposed law is redundant of existing state law that already protects public employees' home addresses, home phone numbers, and Social Security numbers.

The House Majority Leader says the legislation should be enacted for its symbolism, as a gesture of appreciation for the law enforcement community, which has lost police officers in recent killings.

Idaho Bill Would Remove Personal Information of Law Enforcement Officials from Public Record

Idaho law enforcement officials support legislation that would remove personal information, such as home addresses and phone numbers, from the public record. Proponents say the measure is designed to promote the safety of law enforcement. The Idaho Press Club opposes the bill as it does goes against the presumption of openness in government.

Read more here.

Proposed Law Could Limit Public Information in Mississippi

A Mississippi state representative is proposing a bill to ban businesses and government agencies from sharing personal information about employees, including their work telephone numbers or email addresses, a move that could make Mississippi less responsive to the public.

Read more about House Bill 691 here.

N.J. guidelines clarify what court documents are public

In September, a new rule adopted by New Jersey's highest court will define evidence admitted in courts as "open for public inspection," the Star-Ledger reported. Private records will include financial information in divorce proceedings and personal identifiers such as credit card and Social Security numbers. Thomas Cafferty, a lawyer for the New Jersey Press Association said, "It was less than clear before what would be accessible to the public. I think the Albin report makes it clear."

For decades, some residents could not get court documents they were entitled to see because the judiciary had limited guidelines on which records were available for public viewing.

That's expected to change next month when a new rule recently adopted by the state's highest court goes into effect.

Evidence admitted in New Jersey courts are just some of the records specifically defined as "open for public inspection" in the state's new guidelines.

More here.

Should gun-carry permit applications be public?

Many permit owners are uncomfortable knowing that their addresses, gun purchases and other personal information, such as past addictions, are public records. On the other hand, public gun permit databases could help keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. John Harris, executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, said the House committees that deal with Second Amendment issues favor privacy.

What some are calling a matter of privacy, others are calling a dangerous idea. At issue is whether or not applications for gun-carry permits should be kept confidential.

Getting a permit isn't only about learning the rules; a lot of personal information must be given up.

"You have to answer a lot of questions," said John Harris, executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association. "Like, for example, 'How were you discharged from the military?' 'Have you ever been addicted to any kind of alcohol or other substances?' 'Have you ever had any psychiatric problems?' A lot of information is disclosed on the forms that really shouldn't be public."

More here.

The Secret Police Will See You Now...

Rep. Bill Hinkle says a public-records bill he's sponsoring would help protect police officers and their families from retribution for doing their jobs.

But opponents say the proposal — the latest attempt to limit what is considered public information — is too broad, would cost too much to implement and isn't needed.

House Bill 2490 would exempt from disclosure personal information about a commissioned police officer or his or her family members. That would include home addresses, phone numbers, property and tax records and dates of birth.

State law already prohibits government agencies from releasing home addresses and phone numbers of employees — including police officers. But names, birth dates, salaries and job titles are generally available.

Under the bill, citizens could request the full name, year of birth and photograph of individual officers. The officers or their immediate supervisors would first be notified of the request and would be provided the name and city or county of the person requesting the information.

"We have a group of people in this country that protects the homes in our communities, and we're exposing them to a liability that is unfair," said Hinkle, R-Cle Elum.

The bill is opposed by the Coalition for Open Government and media organizations.

"My goal is to keep it from even getting a hearing," said Toby Nixon, president of the Coalition for Open Government, "because once it gets out in the wild, the law-enforcement community can put a lot of political pressure on the Legislature."

Rowland Thompson, a lobbyist for Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington, said the bill would make it much harder for citizens to monitor police and learn about officers accused of wrongdoing.

"These are people who we give a lot of responsibility and trust to, and we allow them to move through the population armed with the ability to incarcerate people," Thompson said. "I mean, we trust them, but it isn't a blind trust."

More here.