Senate Bills Propose Changes to OPRA Laws

It’s been well documented that Galloway Township has seen its share of Open Public Records Act (OPRA) requests over the past year, and now two Senate bills are calling for changes to the OPRA laws.

Some of the changes included clarification of what records are public; the expansion of meetings that would be required to tape, including small subcommittees; prohibiting the assessment of special service charges for extensive research in looking up documents for residents; and requiring certain records to be made available on a municipality’s website.

The bills would also require members of the governing body to reveal any texts or notes sent during meetings, to provide more descriptive agendas and limit add-ons.

One of the bills (S1452) is sponsored by Sen. Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex), who tried for 18 months to get the Department of Education to provide information about how the state lost out on a $400 million federal grant, NJ Spotlight reported.

While Buono was able to obtain much of the information necessary, NJ Spotlight reported that she is unsure of what she didn’t see. Buono said she was able to work around barriers through avenues that the average citizen would not have had and obtaining public records shouldn’t be that difficult.

“I’ve been an advocate of open transparent government for my entire legislative career,” said Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), Senate Majority Leader and primary sponsor of the bills (S1451 and S1452).

“There are a lot of towns passing resolutions (in opposition to the changes),” Weinberg told Patch. “The bills have gone through further tweaking. Some misunderstand what the bills say; some aren’t looking at the latest version. All of these communities should find ways to make it easier to comply with the law instead of finding roadblocks between them and the public.”

One of the bills regarding OPRA has not been updated for 40 years while the other hasn’t been updated for 10, she said.

“When they were originally written, the word Internet didn’t even exist,” she said. “They needed updating with the technological advances that we have today.”

Many of the changes were based on court case rulings, she said. Over the years, government has become more complex and everything elected officials do should be open with some exceptions.

“Everything we do is owned by the public,” she said.

The bills have undergone many changes through compromising with the Municipal Clerks Association, Weinberg said. For example, the bills originally allowed for a shorter timeframe for compliance to OPRA.

The bills allow towns to do more electronically if they have the capability, she said. For example, directing residents to the township webpage for records, contracts and budgets.

“We’re not pushing them to spend money on any of these things,” she said. “In some ways it should be easier for communities.”

Last month, Galloway Township News publisher Harry Scheeler filed a against the township over alleged OPRA violations. At the end of last year, township officials stated they were being overwhelmed with OPRA requests, and Galloway increased the amount of money it sets aside for legal fees in the 2012 budget up to $200,000, from $135,000 last year.

Prior to that, Martin O’Boyle, who filed a lawsuit in September against the township and the acting clerk at the time, Carol Hackney, of violating OPRA, the Common Law Right of Access and violation of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act. O’Boyle disputed the redaction of documents related to requests concerning the conclusion of a former clerk's employment with the township.

This week, Scheeler sent a letter to the office of Atlantic County Prosecutor Ted Housel, calling for an investigation into what he believes to be an Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) violation.

In a letter dated April 17, 2012, Galloway Township News Publisher Harry Scheeler petitions the Atlantic County Prosecutor’s Office to investigate several OPMA violations from the township in regard to the March 13 meeting, in which Thalia C. Kay was introduced as the Acting Deputy Clerk. Scheeler claims he requested the Rice notice that was served to Kay prior to the closed session discussion appointing her to the position, and he was told “no such document exists.” He concludes that the appointment was discussed in executive session without a Rice notice being served to Kay, which would constitute an OPMA violation, as all potential candidates who will be discussed in executive session must be served a Rice notice.

He also states in his letter that he requested both open and closed session minutes from that same meeting, and was denied because the minutes have not yet been approved. He believes the township was required to release the minutes on March 25, but has been told he will receive the minutes on April 24.

He then states that when he requested his grievances be addressed or he would request an investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office, the township and its solicitor remained “unresponsive.”

The Prosecutor’s Office reiterated on Wednesday that it does not acknowledge or deny the existence of its ongoing investigations.

“We fully welcome any outside investigation by any county, state or federal agency,“ Township Manager Arch Liston said in the township’s only comment regarding the investigation.