OPRA, OPMA Targeted for Revision, Municipalities Oppose Bills

AVALON – Two New Jersey Senate bills that would amend portions of the Open Public Records Act and the Open Public Meetings Act came out of committee at the end of June and await a vote by the full Senate. 
Opposition to the bills is growing among state municipalities and the organizations that represent them. Avalon Borough Council heard a discussion of the bills at its Sept. 27 work session.
What the bills propose to include among other things:
•    Stricter agenda notice rules.
•   Expanded scope, bringing many quasi-government agencies under the law including the New Jersey League of Municipalities, the New Jersey School Boards Association, and potentially the Joint Insurance Fund.
•    Wider access to supplemental material behind actions like agendas and resolutions.
•    Required public comment periods.
•    Capability to file information requests via the internet.
•   Fee shifting such that individuals who are successful when filing claims for violations of the law will have their costs covered.
•    Expanded access to deliberations of government bodies concerning contracts and potential resolutions.
• Changes to the composition of the Government Records Council, the group that hears appeals of municipal decisions on access to material.
Advocates of the bills maintain that greater transparency is essential to good government. They argue that OPRA, dating to 2002, needs modernization, especially in light of the technology revolution that has taken place in the intervening years.
Advocates also warn that if the Legislature fails to act, it would invite the courts to decide critical issues. Recent rulings like Paff versus Galloway Township are changing the definition and scope of public records.
Courts are involved in issues of access to electronic records; the rights of non-state residents to use OPRA, access to police records, and deciding when and if a government agency can sue a requestor.
Opponents decry another unfunded mandate from the state. They maintain that the bills also provide greater opportunity for harassment of the municipality through OPRA requests.
Citing the many ways in which the bills expand the scope of the current law, they argue that it all adds up to a new expense for the taxpayer.
The New Jersey League of Municipalities argues that the bills would stretch the responsibilities of municipal clerks significantly without “a revenue source other than the property tax.”
James Waldron, Avalon’s assistant business administrator, warned the borough council Sept. 27 that under the new provisions even good faith mistakes by clerks or governing body members could result in personal exposure for penalties, “calling into question normal indemnification provisions.”
Avalon council will soon pass a resolution codifying its objections. Doing so would have the borough join the Municipal Clerks’ Association of New Jersey which has already gone on record with its desire to see these bills defeated.
Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg (D-37th) is the bill’s principal supporter. The legislation is co-sponsored by Senate Whip Joseph Pinocchio, (R-26th).
Weinberg has called for reform of the state’s transparency laws for years but has never been able to get amendments out of committee. This current attempt has the companion Assembly bill still in committee.
No vote is expected in Trenton on these bills until after the November election.
Waldron said, “The fact that the bills still have only two sponsors speaks volumes,” indicating his feeling that they stand little chance of passage.
Advocacy groups like the New Jersey Foundation for Open Government continue to maintain that modernization of the transparency laws is essential.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.