Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Freedom Of The Press topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hudson County adopts rules for use of county buildings; counsel says measure balances access and operations, critics warn of chill on recording
Summary
The board adopted a county‑building use ordinance after a public hearing in which county counsel described the measure as balancing public recording rights and employees' ability to conduct work; media activists said the rules risk restricting press access and civil liberties. Commissioner William O'Dea voted no.
Hudson County adopted a second‑reading ordinance establishing regulations for the use of county buildings at its Jan. 23 meeting. County Counsel Donato J. Battista told the board the measure "is not a prohibition" on recording but is intended "to balance the right of conducting business, the right of the employees performing the work, and the right of the public to know what's going on in the County building." (Donato J. Battista, Hudson County Counsel.)
Several members of the public pushed back during the hearing. A person using the name Full Court Press said the ordinance was unnecessary and risked chilling the press, adding that recording in public is protected ‘‘subject to a time, place, and manner restriction.’’ Another speaker, Leroy Truth of Leroy Truth Investigations, said the proposed rules reflected a pattern of county officials retaliating against activists who document government action.
Hudson County Commissioner William O'Dea was the lone recorded No vote on final adoption; other commissioners voted to adopt the ordinance. Advocates and some members of the public argued the ordinance, as written, could be applied to limit recording in County buildings; county counsel said the goal was to preserve both public access to information and the county's ability to conduct work without undue interference.
What the ordinance does and does not say
- County counsel characterized the text as regulatory and not a blanket ban on recording; he framed it as an attempt to balance operational needs and public access. - Public critics said the language could be used to restrict press activity; they urged the board to protect press and First Amendment rights explicitly.
What happens next
The ordinance was adopted at final reading. Citizens and media activists indicated they may pursue legal review or challenges. The county did not confirm in the meeting record any immediate administrative policy changes beyond adoption; Commissioner O'Dea asked staff to follow up on public comments and voted against the measure.
