Biloxi council holds first reading on public-records ordinance after WLOX raises access concerns

The Biloxi City Council on Monday held a first reading of an ordinance to amend the city code on public records and Mississippi uniform crash reports after a WLOX reporter told the council she feared the changes would weaken open-records timelines.

Natalie Campin, managing editor at WLOX News, told the council the proposed city ordinance “offers no explanation as to why the administration believes changes are necessary, nor does it explain why the city would make changes that contradict the Mississippi Open Records Act.” She urged the council to hold a public hearing before adopting changes that, in her reading, would alter the timetable for responses required by state law.

The proposed ordinance was moved by Councilman Glavin and seconded by Councilman Guynes for a first reading. No final vote adopting the ordinance took place at the meeting; the item will return for further discussion at a future council meeting.

City counsel Greg (City Attorney) responded to Campin’s concerns by noting the city ordinance already incorporates the state law by reference, saying, “This law is already in the statute.” He said the city was revising local text to clean up language and not to remove state deadlines, and offered to follow up with Campin directly.

Campin cited specific provisions and the Mississippi Public Records Act (Miss. Code Ann. § 25-61), and provided the council copies of the statute. She said the state law “sets specific timetables for complying with records requests, which your amendment seeks to remove,” and that the Mississippi Ethics Commission has upheld the Act’s timetables.

Council members asked for clarifications and materials before the next meeting. Dr. Tisdale requested a highlighted copy showing deletions and additions at the next meeting; Greg said the redlined text is available but that staff could prepare a clearer highlighted version. Counsel also said the city routinely meets statutory response periods in practice and gave a recent example of a complex request — “every document between the city and CenterPoint Energy for the last 6 years” — that required more time to estimate and produce.

No change to state law was made at the meeting, and council members framed the discussion as clarifying local language and process rather than supplanting state requirements. The item will return to the council for additional review and possible revision at a later meeting; staff was asked to provide clearer marked-up language for the council and public before the next reading.