Police agencies will be able to charge members of the public and the media $75 an hour for body camera footage, dashcam video or surveillance video inside jails, under a law signed late Thursday by Gov. Mike DeWine.
Groups representing news media and citizens had urged DeWine to veto that provision which had been added to - what was known as the Christmas tree bill during lame duck. Opponents said it should have been stand-alone legislation considered by committees in the legislative process.
DeWine signed the bill just before midnight Thursday night. His office made the announcement via an emailed news release.
Gary Daniels, lobbyist for the ACLU of Ohio, said slipping the provision into the big Christmas tree bill without putting it through the legislative process and then signing it without talking about it to reporters was a sneaky and deliberate move by DeWine and the legislature.
鈥淭hey don't want people coming in before the legislature testifying before committees or having meetings with them or what have you to talk about what some possible solutions or compromises might be. No, it's their way or the highway,鈥� Daniels said. 鈥淭hey're going to do this in secret and then the rest of us who are concerned about public accountability and transparency and policing in Ohio, we're out of luck at this point.鈥�
But cities and local police departments were pleased. Kent Scarrett, executive director of the Ohio Municipal League, praised the legislature and DeWine for passing the provision, which helps cities deal with costs of making video available.
鈥淲e don't dictate how the process works. We're a part of the process and we just appreciate that the concerns were heard and that action was taken,鈥� Scarrett said.
Even though this provision was passed without public hearings in a shortcut process, Scarrett said it鈥檚 not a new issue for local police agencies.
鈥淚t's been a problem because there's been an exponential increase in requests for body cam footage. Sometimes these requests are for groups that are producing content for, in some instances, for-profit situations. And sometimes the request can be more of a mining exercise, just trying to find content to be put on social media or other video production outlets,鈥� Scarett said.
He said it takes time and money to produce and release video, and the law will provide some financial recourse for police agencies, especially small ones.
鈥淭here's just got to be a way for us to recoup some of the taxpayer dollars that are being spent to respond to these public record requests,鈥� Scarrett said.
The law will allow local police agencies to charge $75 an hour for processing requests for bodycam or video footage with a maximum charge of $750 per request. Scarrett thinks that鈥檚 reasonable.
鈥淚 don't think it鈥檚 an astronomical amount of, of money to ask or a fee level to set. It's under $100,鈥� Scarrett said.
But Daniels said it鈥檚 too expensive for many citizens who would request video.
鈥淲hat it is going to mean is that only those people out there with the most resources, the largest of the media companies are going to be able to afford to get access to these types of videos and the rest of us will essentially be left in the dark,鈥� Daniels said. 鈥淪o it's a huge blow for transparency and policing here in Ohio.鈥�
Daniels said a better way to deal with this problem is for the state to give communities more money for police to handle these issues. He said the law will lead to fewer requests by citizens who want to find the truth about police actions. And that, he said, is a big problem when it comes to being accountable to taxpayers.
鈥淲e have a state that has a well-deserved reputation for corruption across the country. We have a state where there has been multiple controversial police shootings over the last several years,鈥� Daniels said. 鈥淭o say that the answer to these types of problems is put public information behind a paywall is absolutely not something that the state of Ohio should continue to pursue.鈥�
Though DeWine didn鈥檛 talk to reporters after he signed the bill, he recently said he is trying to balance the needs of police agencies, especially small departments, that have been inundated with requests for video with the public鈥檚 need for the video.
鈥淚 am a strong proponent of police cameras. And so, as we have seen the proliferation of that, we think it is the best practice. It also creates a lot more, film and a lot more video. And so again, we're seeing a lot more examples of where the media will request this,鈥� DeWine said. 鈥淚t is a matter of public policy. Are we going to require some reimbursement for that?鈥�
In DeWine鈥檚 written statement put out by his office Thursday night, he left the door open to those concerned about public accountability.
"If the language in House Bill 315 related to public records turns out to have unforeseen consequences, I will work with the General Assembly to amend the language to address such legitimate concerns,鈥� DeWine said in the statement.
Daniels isn鈥檛 ruling it out a lawsuit. But he said it鈥檚 too early right now to determine what actions might be taken.
