Transparency takes a hit in new Pa. law

Police audio and video recordings are now exempt from the state’s Right-to-Know law.

A new Pennsylvania law exempts police audio and video recordings from the state’s Right-to-Know Law, leaving the release of those records largely to the discretion of police.

The bill, signed into law earlier this month by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, also clears legal hurdles that kept police departments from using body cameras. The legislation was supported by police groups. Lawmakers passed it overwhelmingly.

It’s another victory for secrecy over transparency, for suspicion over confidence.

Two weeks ago, we decried the decision by the Lancaster County Commissioners to encrypt police transmissions, blocking the public — and media — from hearing what’s going on in the county.

We opposed that decision because there’s no evidence that radio transmissions have made policing more dangerous or more difficult. We believe such measures erode transparency and openness in government. And the public depends on the information gathered from monitoring police scanners.

Then, we heard from a few critics.

“It is a shame that LNP, like many other groups and organizations, use a tragic incident to make a case for furthering their own agenda. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in today,” wrote Randy Herman, of Manor Township, in a letter to the editor.

What agenda? Our job — and that of any other news organization — is to cover the news and keep people informed. That’s not an agenda, it’s a responsibility, and LNP takes it pretty seriously. News outlets have been monitoring police scanners for decades, and we have yet to hear of one instance in which a police officer’s safety or ability to do his job was compromised because of it. Now this. As we’ve written before, we strongly support the practice of equipping law enforcement officers with body cameras. These cameras provide both accountability and protection for police officers, and can help build public trust.

Police body cameras helped to prove that four Cleveland officers were justified in using lethal force in March 2015 against a man who had threatened to kill his wife and landlady.

But removing audio and video records from the state’s Right-to-Know Law will effectively block, at least in most cases, public and media access to those records.

If a lack of public trust and faith in government institutions is indeed a real problem, this law only serves to exacerbate mistrust.

Holly Lubart, director of government affairs for the Pennsylvania News Media Association, said after the Senate passed the bill in May that it “will not permit meaningful public access to police body camera records, which in turn eliminates accountability, one of the primary reasons for collecting this footage in the first place.”

Elected officials talk a lot about accountability, but it’s getting more and more difficult to take them seriously when they pass laws like this.

As is the case with encryption, there’s no evidence that access to audio and video recordings via the Right-to-Know Law makes a police officer’s or prosecutor’s job more difficult. But we can be reasonably sure that blocking access to those recordings will only increase the level of suspicion among the public toward law enforcement. This can’t be a good thing for anyone, especially police officers who are trying to build trust in the community.

We support law enforcement. We understand that police officers have a dangerous and difficult job. What we’re having a hard time unraveling is how making the relationship between the police and public more adversarial serves the best interest of either.

This is not a Democratic or Republican issue. In fact, this bill had overwhelming, bipartisan support.

Such cooperation would normally be encouraging, until you consider that the governor and Legislature can’t figure out how to balance the budget but can easily pass a bill that strikes yet another blow to transparency.

Yes, our governor and Legislature can’t find an answer to the state’s most pressing issue, but they were able to come up with a solution to a problem that didn’t exist.