Two bills that would add to the categories of information prohibited from being disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) received public hearings on February 13, as did a bill that would allow police departments to charge for redacting dashboard and body-worn camera footage. Another bill that would implement recommendations made by the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) was also part of the hearing.
Two bills, SB 1209 and HB 6883, relate to the categories of public employees residential addresses that are exempt from disclosure, a FOIA exemption that the legislature has routinely attempted to expand in recent years.
HB 6883 would not only add the the district attorney for Connecticut and attorneys with the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to the list of public employees whose residential addresses are exempt from FOIA disclosure, it would also expand an existing exemption that prohibits the disclosure of the address of housing for domestic violence victims to include housing for sexual assault victims and stipulate that public agencies discussing that housing would have to enter executive session to do so.
Rep. Sarah Keitt, D-Fairfield, said in testimony that the bill would “save lives” and urged the Government Oversight Committee to adopt a favorable report.
Committee co-chair Rep. Lucy Dathan, D-Norwalk, questioned whether adding an exemption for those addresses would affect whether they could be addressed in public forums, such as during the zoning and planning processes for a new building. Keitt suggested they would be and that the addresses also be redacted from documents like reports on a fire.
Russell Blair, director of education and communication for the FOIC, provided testimony on all four bills. The FOIC also filed testimony separately.
Blair noted that while the FOIC does not object to the part of the bill that expands the protection of the existing statute exempting the addresses of housing for sexual assault victims, it was concerned about the executive session requirement. Blair pointed to processes like planning and zoning that require public meetings. He suggested either removing the meetings provision or modifying the language. He also questioned whether it would be necessary for information such as who would eventually live in a housing complex to be disclosed during the planning and zoning process.
Rep. Ken Gucker, D-Danbury, added that he has a lot of experience with planning and zoning and expressed concern with the balance between protecting domestic violence and sexual assault victims and preserving the public’s right to know, describing the matter as “like threading the needle from 5,000 feet.”
Michele Jacklin, co-president of the Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information, testified against the portion of HB 6883 that would broaden the exemption for residential addresses of public employees, relaying personal experiences of being the victim of data breaches and stating that suggesting exempting public employees’ addresses protects them provides a “false sense of security.” Jacklin stated, “we live in times of security risk.”
Jacklin also testified in favor of HB 6882, a bill that would implement recommendations made by the FOIC. The FOIC has submitted the same recommendations, which largely contain technical updates to FOIA, several years in a row, but the bill has died on the legislative calendar. Jacklin said a section of the bill that would expand the definition of hand-held scanners that requesters are allowed to bring to inspect public records to include smartphones would bring the state into the 21st century.
A number of working professionals also testified in favor of HB 6883 and SB 1209, which would add public school teachers to the list of public employees whose residential addresses are exempt from FOIA disclosure.
Travis Woodward, an engineer with the Connecticut Department of Transportation and president of CSEA SEIU Local 2001, called SB 1209 “a start” but stated it should apply to all public workers. Woodward argued that DOT employees are at risk of harassment, as are all public employees, because of abuses of the FOIA process. He added that workers weren’t asking for special treatment but to keep them and their families safe.
Members of the Connecticut Education Association (CEA) also testified in support of the bill, stating there has been a rise in “incivility” and harassment directed at teachers in recent years, and they supported teachers’ addresses being withheld from FOIA requests.
Rep. Devin Carney, R-Lyme, asked if teachers are required to provide school districts with their personal phone numbers. CEA vice-president Joslyn Delancey replied that many teachers are required to use their phone numbers for two-factor authentication.
The FOIC noted in its testimony opposing the bill, as it has in previous testimony on similar bills, that there is a statutory process for certain public employees to request a business address be substituted for a residential address in certain records. It also noted that giving special protections to certain classes of public employees may create constitutional issues.
Testimony was also offered in support of SB 973, which would create a fee schedule and allow police departments to charge for the cost of redacting body-worn and dashboard camera footage. The bill has appeared in previous legislative sessions but has not made it to final passage.
Karl Jacobson, New Haven’s chief of police, testified in favor of the bill on behalf of the Connecticut Police Chief Association. Jacobson said the bill would give assistance to police, allowing them to continue providing information and videos not exempt from FOIA disclosure with a fee structure that doesn’t currently exist for digital media as it does for written records. Jacobson also suggested the fees police would collect would help take care of officers’ mental health and wellness, as he said reviewing video for FOIA requests causes officers to relive incidents “over and over again.”
Gucker asked Jacobson if implementing the fee structure would cut down on the number of FOIA requests departments received. Jacobson estimated his department receives 50 to 60 requests a month and that it would reduce about 20 to 30 percent of requests, which he described as “fishing expeditions.”
The FOIC also supports the bill.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
