Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Park Reservation Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would exempt campers’ reservation data from public disclosure
Summary
House Bill 59 would exempt individually identifiable reservation information held by Missouri State Parks from public-record disclosure to protect campers’ safety and privacy; conservation and parks groups supported the change while press witnesses urged caution about reducing transparency.
House Bill 59 would add an exemption to Missouri’s Sunshine Law for individually identifiable customer information held by the Missouri State Parks reservation system, Representative Bruce Sasseman told the Committee on Legislative Review.
"There's no compelling public interest in accessing personal information for those visiting your state parks," Representative Bruce Sasseman said, adding that disclosure of reservation details could reveal when a visitor’s home would be vacant and raise safety concerns. He said some park staff had received sunshine requests the department found "suspicious" and had elevated safety concerns as a result.
Witnesses from the Department of Natural Resources and park organizations said they support the measure. Ali Gatwood, legislative liaison for the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, said currently only credit card information is protected and the agency sought to extend privacy protections to other reservation data. Kaina (representing the Missouri Park and Recreation Association and The Nature Conservancy) and Dawn Nicholas of the Missouri Parks Association also testified in favor, saying callers had requested campground rosters and contact details and that disclosure could expose visitors’ home addresses.
Opposition testimony came from the Missouri Press Association. Mike Jenner, a retired newspaper editor testifying for the press association, argued the bill "erodes Missouri sunshine law by making public information secret" and said citizens have a right to know who uses state resources. Jenner and other opponents suggested the bill was a solution in search of a problem and warned about overbroad secrecy.
Supporters said exemptions in other states and concern about illegal trafficking of wildlife and safety risks to campers justified a limited exemption. The committee held a public hearing with testimony on both sides; the transcript records no committee vote or final action.
