By Shereen Siewert | Wausau Pilot & Review
A bill that would allow police agencies to charge stiff fees for the release of body-cam footage is drawing support from some local lawmakers and officials, but is drawing significant pushback from open records advocates and media outlets throughout Wisconsin.
Wausau Mayor Katie Rosenberg, Rep. Katrina Shankland (D-Stevens Point) and Wausau Police Chief Matt Barnes on Monday will hold a press conference to discuss Senate Bill 789, which they characterize as one that will discourage frivolous open records requests. The bill would allow police to charge people who request public information for the time and expense incurred if they find it necessary to blur details from video prior to being released.
Supporters of the bill point to widespread buy-in from police agencies statewide and say the legislation was crafted in close cooperation with law enforcement. But critics say the new regulations would keep important public records away from the citizens who own them and who deserve to know how well officials are working on their behalf. Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council President Bill Lueders is calling on Gov. Tony Evers to veto the bill.
Barnes, in October, said YouTubers are requesting body cam footage of cases involving charges of resisting arrest, “flooding” the department with their asks. Each body cam video is reviewed before it can be released. YouTube users then post the video and earn money for video views.
The Badger State Sheriff’s Association also submitted testimony that one department, which was not named in the testimony, has also been inundated with requests for video and received six in a single night.
But critics say even if that is true and is not a rare instance, discouraging access to public records is contrary to the spirit of Wisconsin’s open records law, which specifically makes it the job of public officials to make public records available.
In a recent column, Lueders explained that an amendment to the bill introduced on Feb. 12 and approved on Feb. 15 exempts individuals “directly involved in the event to which the requested records relate,” and waives the fee for requesters who make fewer than ten requests per calendar year and who stipulate in writing that they “will not use the audio or video content for financial gain,” excluding as part of a civil action. The penalty for a violation is a $10,000 fine.
“The search number limit is troubling because it would effectively end the ability of some media outlets to investigate police practices outside of isolated individual cases,” Lueders wrote. “The amendment wording is imprecise: Does a request for, say, three videos, count as one request or three? It is also not clear whether a request for a video that has already been redacted would count toward the total, or what happens if multiple requesters seek the same video at the same time.”
Also troubling, says Lueders: the language about “financial gain” that requesters must attest to in writing could potentially be invoked against news outlets that are still managing to make money.
“The bill does not state who decides whether a particular use constitutes forbidden financial gain or on what basis it would be decided,” Lueders wrote. “Either way, the provision disregards one of the fundamental principles of the state’s Open Records Law – that it should not matter who is seeking a given record or why.”
Sen. Jesse James, R-Altoona, and Rep. John Spiros, R-Marshfield, both of whom have worked as police officers, are key sponsors of SB 789. James, in his written testimony supporting the bill, stated that “a fair number of open records requests” for police records can be “particularly tedious and time consuming” to process.
But critics say that’s just too bad. Giving public records to the public who owns them is part of the job.
“This bill, if signed into law, would undermine the goal of transparency that access to these records was intended to provide,” Lueders said. “Police agencies across Wisconsin have spent millions of tax dollars to equip officers with cameras. We should not now make it more difficult for media outlets to obtain the video records that are being created as a result.”
