Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Records topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ohio committee hears sponsor testimony to limit police charges for videos depicting individuals
Summary
Sponsor testimony on Senate Bill 123 argued the bill would bar law enforcement from charging fees to produce or redact video records when the requester is the person depicted or their representative, citing unintended consequences from last session’s House Bill 315.
Senator Hicks Hudson, the ranking member, told the Ohio Senate Judiciary Committee during the first hearing on Senate Bill 123 that the bill would stop law enforcement agencies from charging fees to prepare certain video records when the requester is an individual depicted in the video or a close representative.
Hudson said the change responds to language inserted at the end of last year’s legislative session under House Bill 315. "This was to authorize a law enforcement agency to charge any requester to prepare a video record for inspection or production," Hudson said, and she argued the provision went beyond "the actual cost of production" and could place an "exorbitant cost" on people depicted in footage who seek records to defend themselves or to investigate potential wrongdoing.
The bill, as Hudson described it, would prohibit charging for preparing a video record for inspection or production when the requester is an individual known or presumed to be depicted in the video or a representative (spouse, parent or child) of that individual. Hudson acknowledged smaller agencies may have limited capacity and that some administrative costs can be legitimate, but she said the law should not deter someone depicted in government-funded footage from obtaining it.
Hudson also noted that the original change in House Bill 315 permitted agencies to determine "actual cost, including all costs incurred in reviewing, blurring, or otherwise obscuring, redacting, uploading, or producing the video records, including but not limited to the storage medium on which the record is produced, staff time, and any other relevant overhead necessary to comply with the request." She said that breadth had created the problem SB123 seeks to fix.
Chair Manning took no committee questions on the sponsor testimony, and the bill was left at first hearing with no formal action taken.
The hearing record contains only sponsor remarks and no committee direction to staff or reported amendments.
