Public Record Access Is About To Take A Nosedive In NJ, Advocates Say

NEW JERSEY — A controversial bill that would make sweeping changes to New Jersey’s open public records law is headed to the desk of Gov. Phil Murphy for a potential signature – or a possible veto.

The proposed law, S-2930/A-4045, passed a vote in both chambers of the state Legislature on Monday. It would make changes to the New Jersey Open Public Records Act (OPRA), which guarantees the public’s right to certain government records, and creates an appeal process for denials. Learn more about OPRA here.

Some critics of the current process allege that it needs to be revamped, with multiple New Jersey towns citing expensive labor bills related to the requests.

Supporters of OPRA acknowledge that it could use an update – particularly the clauses that allow corporate businesses and data brokers to request records that are used for private profit. But the law is a crucial safeguard for democracy, they add, arguing that gutting it would be devastating to the public's “right to know” what their government is doing in their names.

The proposed law has seen several revisions as it moves toward the finish line. One of them? The removal of a clause that would roll out request limitations and registration fees for data brokers.

NorthJersey.com reported that the most recent version of the bill also:

• includes the renewed ability to make anonymous requests and the removal of exemptions for call and email logs and digital calendars
• implements stricter requirements on how to request things like texts and emails including specific accounts, times, topics and titles
• makes modifications to the provision limiting access to metadata to allow for access only to the "portion that identifies authorship, identity of editor, and time of change"

NJ Citizen Action’s executive director Dena Mottola Jaborska wrote in an op-ed on NJ Spotlight News that the revamped bill allows public agencies to sue requestors for “interfering with government operations,” a nebulous term that is left open to interpretation. This would have a chilling effect on requestors, especially if they are delving into records kept by an entity with something to hide, Jaborska argued.

Meanwhile, the proposed changes to the “fee-shifting” provisions of the law – which remain intact in the updated version of the bill – would mean that lawyers who challenge unfair denials on behalf of their clients may not get paid, Jaborska continued.

The end result? Nonprofits and people without deep pockets won’t be able to afford justice, Jaborska said.

ACLU-New Jersey deputy policy director Jim Sullivan also has concerns about the proposed rule changes, saying that the nonprofit is urging Gov. Murphy to veto the bill.

“It’s shameful that the majority of the New Jersey Legislature voted in favor of S2930/A4045 – a bill that will severely restrict access to government records and limit the public’s ability to hold elected officials accountable – despite overwhelming opposition from community members, stakeholders, advocates, and 81 percent of voters from across the ideological spectrum,” Sullivan said.

“Legislative leaders should be strengthening mechanisms for government transparency, not undermining them in backroom deals shielded from public scrutiny,” Sullivan added.

However, supporters of the bill such as the New Jersey State League of Municipalities insist that it would be a win for the Garden State.

“There have been a lot of misconceptions and misinformation about this legislation since its introduction,” the league wrote earlier this week, urging its members to contact their local state lawmakers in favor of the bill.

According to the group, the proposed bill doesn’t hinder journalists or members of the public from using OPRA to get access to public records. Instead, it “modernizes” the law to account for the technology and business practices that have emerged in the past 22 years.

Other benefits will include:

• “It will give judges and the Government Records Council the discretion to award prevailing attorney fees, instead of granting it automatically”
• “It will reaffirm the original intent of OPRA to provide copies of records in the municipality’s possession and not create records or perform research”

Despite supporters' assertions that the changes won't impact journalists, professional groups such as the New Jersey Society of Professional Journalists have their doubts.

Murphy hasn’t said whether he’ll sign the bill into law if it reaches his desk, the group noted in a statement on Monday.

"We’re concerned that state lawmakers who have a tenuous grasp of many aspects of OPRA are leading an orchestrated crackdown of our public records law," said Isaac Avilucea, a board member and former Trentonian reporter.

"They’ve seemingly had in ear plugs at public hearings, tuning out dozens of stakeholders who told them what’ll happen if OPRA is repealed," Avilucea said. "We’re hoping Gov. Murphy actually listens to voters who don’t want changes to the ‘people’s law."

Former New Jersey Sen. Loretta Weinberg had some harsh words for her Democratic Party colleagues who voted in favor of the bill on Monday – and their Republican Party peers who helped to push it across the finish line.

“Today, the Democratic-led State Legislature, a body I served for more than two decades, collaborated with Republicans to fundamentally gut our Open Public Records Act,” Weinberg said.

“Leadership reached across the aisle to pass this anti-democratic bill because they didn't have enough democratic votes in their caucus,” Weinberg added. “Secrecy and evading accountability, I guess, has turned bipartisan. I could not be more disappointed in the New Jersey State Legislature.”

Send local news tips and correction requests to eric.kiefer@patch.com. Learn more about advertising on Patch here. Find out how to post announcements or events to your local Patch site.