Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Candidate Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reports candidate privacy bill after debate over FOIA exemptions
Summary
SB632, which would let candidates keep home addresses out of public FOIA records and allow custodians to redact contact details absent candidate consent, was reported as amended after supporters emphasized personal safety and opponents worried about weakening FOIA oversight.
The committee advanced SB632 as amended after senators and public witnesses debated whether the bill would inappropriately limit public access to candidates’ contact information.
Sponsor Senator Eyre offered a line amendment clarifying that custodians must redact a candidate’s address if written consent is not granted or if the candidate does not respond within five business days to a custodian’s request. Eyre said the measure “eliminates the requirement that a candidate's home address be publicly disclosed” and allows candidates to use a unique voter ID number for residency verification. The bill also would enroll certain officials into a protected voter system and require custodians to redact home addresses, phone numbers and email addresses unless a candidate affirmatively provides them.
Megan Rhine with the Coalition for Open Government opposed portions of the bill because of FOIA exemptions, saying she feared an exemption could apply in perpetuity to an unsuccessful candidate and would remove an important public check on government-held records. “We have no opposition to the rest of the bill. Our concern is with lines 59 and 61, the FOIA exemption,” Rhine said.
Eyre responded the state board of elections retains full authority to confirm residency and enforcement mechanisms remain intact; he said the measure does not weaken residency requirements. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill as amended for further consideration.
