New Jersey Mayors Seek to Limit Public Records Requests, Threatening Transparency

Proposal to Restrict Public Access

In New Jersey, influential groups are advocating for a bill that would significantly alter the state’s Open Public Records Act (OPRA). This legislation aims to make it more challenging for the public to obtain government documents, with the state legislature possibly voting on it today. A key provision of the bill would permit state and local agencies to sue individuals who make numerous document requests.

New Limits on Public Inquiry

The proposed bill allows courts to issue restraining orders against individuals deemed to be “harassing” government agencies with their requests or “substantially interrupting” government operations. These orders could restrict the number and scope of requests or even completely revoke an individual’s right to access government records.

Protecting Officials at the Public's Expense

Politicians in New Jersey are eager for this power. Last year, Irvington Township sued an elderly woman, accusing her of “bullying and annoying” officials with her frequent information requests. Although the lawsuit was eventually dropped due to public backlash, Irvington then threatened legal action against First Amendment lawyer Adam Steinbaugh for seeking more records related to the case.

Support and Criticism

The League of Municipalities, the New Jersey Conference of Mayors, and the New Jersey Association of Counties support the bill, citing the burden of excessive records requests. William Caruso, legislative counsel for the mayors’ group, even argued that the bill should impose more restrictions on the public’s ability to request information.

CJ Griffin, director of the Stein Public Interest Center and vice president of the Board of Trustees for the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, has strongly opposed the bill. “So what if many people want many records? It’s OUR government. Every OPRA request indicates someone is engaged and wants to know what’s happening in their government,” he wrote on social media. (Griffin is currently representing Reason in an OPRA-related matter.)

Impact on Public Accountability

The bill includes provisions that would allow requesters to pay for expedited access to records, require more specificity in requests for government emails, and limit access to certain types of government metadata. Critics like Griffin argue that these changes would favor commercial requesters and shield New Jersey’s infamously corrupt political landscape from scrutiny.

Records obtained through OPRA were crucial in exposing the 2014 “Bridgegate” scandal, where former Governor Chris Christie’s office intentionally caused traffic congestion to punish a political adversary. A former attorney for The Record, the newspaper that first reported the scandal, has stated that the proposed bill would have hindered their investigation.

Legal and Financial Ramifications

The bill also complicates the process of suing agencies that withhold public records. Currently, those who win public records lawsuits can have their legal fees covered by the agency. This aligns with the federal Freedom of Information Act and most state records laws. The new bill, however, would only allow legal fees if the court finds the agency acted in “bad faith.”

Supporters argue that the current system unfairly burdens taxpayers with the cost of genuine mistakes. However, New Jersey Comptroller Kevin Walsh suggests that restricting public records access could end up costing taxpayers more by increasing the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse. “Some of our best tips come from concerned residents who have filed OPRA requests,” Walsh noted on social media.

Real-World Consequences

A recent state assembly hearing highlighted this issue. A town clerk complained about Easthampton Township paying $13,000 in attorney fees after being sued by Libertarians for Transparent Government for payroll records in 2018. The lawsuit revealed that a police officer was paid $321,942.17 while suspended, which the New Jersey Superior Court later ordered the officer to repay.

Conclusion

Griffin advises New Jersey residents concerned about saving money: “Tell agencies to stop violating OPRA! You can’t sue or get fees if they follow the law!”

This push by public officials to reduce transparency is a direct attempt to exploit taxpayers, exemplified by cases like the officer being paid while suspended. Government power is already extensive, and now officials claim that fulfilling public records requests is too costly. However, the real issue is that unchecked power and lack of transparency result in substantial waste of taxpayer money, far exceeding the time and effort required to process these requests.

Contact Information

Please feel free to let Governor Murphy what you think of limiting the publics access to open records:

Governor Phil Murphy
Officer of Governor Phil Murphy
The State House
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

Email: Constituent.relations@nj.gov
Phone: 609-292-6000
Twitter: @GovMurphy