Committee holds first hearing on bill to bar fees for people seeking body-worn and other agency videos

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Manning opened the committee’s first hearing on Senate Bill 123, which would restrict law-enforcement agencies from charging fees to produce or prepare video records when the requester is “an individual known or presumed to be depicted” in the recording or that person’s spouse, parent or child.

Ranking Member Hicks Hudson, who offered sponsor testimony, said the change responds to language added in the previous general assembly and argues the amendment allows agencies to charge excessive amounts. “This was to authorize a law enforcement agency to charge any requester to prepare a video record for inspection or production,” Hicks Hudson said. “The agency may determine the 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.”

Hudson told the committee she understands that smaller agencies may face staffing and resource constraints, but said the bill should balance agency costs against the right of an individual depicted in footage to access material that could be important to defend themselves or document possible wrongdoing. “We need to be able to balance what has occurred by causing this, what I consider an exorbitant cost for those people who are depicted in the video,” she said.

Hudson also noted the bill’s narrow target: she said sponsors drafted the change to address people who gather video to promote themselves on social platforms, but that the current language swept too broadly and captured people who may have been harmed in encounters with law enforcement. She concluded by asking committee members for “strong consideration of this bill,” and offered to answer questions; none were asked during the hearing.

Chair Manning recorded the matter as having had its first hearing and moved to the next item on the agenda.

The hearing record does not show any formal vote on SB 123 during this session, and no implementation details (fee caps, appeals process, or definitions of “production cost”) were specified in testimony. The bill remains at the committee hearing stage.