Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Arkansas, other states chip away at public’s right to informatio­n

- ANDREW DEMILLO AND RYAN J. FOLEY

LITTLE ROCK — Arkansas lawmakers marked the 50-year anniversar­y of the Freedom of Informatio­n Act in February with a resolution calling it “a shining example of open government” that had ensured access to vital public records for generation­s.

They spent the following weeks debating and, in many cases approving, new exemptions to the law in what critics called an unpreceden­ted attack on the public’s right to know.

When they were finished, universiti­es could keep secret all informatio­n related to their police forces, including their size and the names and salaries of officers. Public schools could shield a host of facts related to security, including the identities of teachers carrying concealed weapons and emergency response plans. And state Capitol police could withhold anything they believed could be detrimenta­l to public safety if made public.

The new laws left grandmothe­r Annie Bryant worried that she and other parents could now be kept in the dark about how schools protect kids.

“I don’t want to be overly aggressive to the point that we block out avenues and end up robbing parents, robbing students of informatio­n about their safety,” said Bryant, who lives in Pine Bluff

and spoke out against the school security secrecy during a legislativ­e hearing.

Lawmakers across the country introduced and debated dozens of bills during this year’s legislativ­e sessions that would close or limit public access to a wide range of government records and meetings, according to a review by The Associated Press and numerous state press associatio­ns.

Most of those proposals did not become law, but freedom of informatio­n advocates in some states said they were struck by the number of bills they believed would harm the public interest, and they are bracing for more fights next year.

Lawmakers supporting the limits said other concerns such as security, privacy and business interests can outweigh the public’s right to informatio­n in specific cases.

They said they proposed the changes after hearing complaints about informatio­n sought by specific requesters and general concerns about the cost and time of fulfilling the requests. Criticism of journalist­s seeking the records or citizens filing repeat requests sometimes came up in debate.

In Arkansas, a request for seemingly innocuous informatio­n became the catalyst for the sweeping bill passed earlier this year that exempts all “records or other informatio­n” held by universiti­es that, if released, could potentiall­y harm public safety.

A photograph­er filed a request in 2015 for the names of officers assigned to work a security detail for the upcoming Mississipp­i State-Arkansas football game. The woman, who was shooting the game for AP, wanted to learn whether she might cross paths with an officer she had accused of rape.

University of Arkansas officials were unaware of the motive behind the request and were focused on preventing a terrorist attack at the stadium. The new law they backed specifical­ly shields informatio­n related to the number of security personnel on campuses, any personal informatio­n about them, and all of their emergency plans, procedures and studies.

The bill also included a similar exemption for public schools. The sponsor, Republican Sen. Gary Stubblefie­ld, said he pushed for that language after a district armed some of its teachers and staff as volunteer security guards, saying he wanted to keep their identities secret for safety reasons.

“I’m not against FOI. I believe strongly in transparen­cy, I really do, but common sense just tells you there are some things that you cannot release especially in the day in which we live,” Stubblefie­ld said. “Because there are actually people out there who are just looking for something, an edge where they can get in and do some damage. And I just don’t think we ought to give it to them.”

Supporters of the exemption for the Arkansas Capitol Police said it was needed because the news media had written in 1998 about secret plans to allow former Gov. Mike Huckabee to escape his office by climbing a ladder into an abandoned elevator shaft.

The disclosure caused the state to delay and modify the escape route, which was completed in 2001 and later shown to reporters by the governor’s staff. The new law gives the agency wide authority to keep secret any records related to security at the Capitol and governor’s mansion.

By the end of the session, some lawmakers believed the proposed changes were going too far.

The Legislatur­e voted to create a new task force to study the exemptions, including whether any should be deleted or added. The House voted 33-32 to block legislatio­n that would allow the government to declare a public records request “unduly burdensome” and give 15 business days to comply instead complying on request or allowing three days for records in use or storage.

A measure that would have allowed universiti­es to keep secret wide categories of records related to potential legal action failed.

Tom Larimer, executive director of the Arkansas Press Associatio­n, said lawmakers did more damage to freedom of informatio­n than in any other session since 2004.

“We’ve always had a certain number of legislator­s who have had no use for the Freedom of Informatio­n Act and have no serious concerns about transparen­cy in government,” he said. “But it just seemed like there were more of them this time, and they were more willing to side with those who are perpetuall­y on the side of weakening the FOI.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States