Connecticut 2024 Regular Session

Connecticut Senate Bill SB00431

Introduced
3/13/24  
Introduced
3/13/24  
Report Pass
3/22/24  
Refer
3/13/24  
Refer
3/13/24  
Refer
4/4/24  
Report Pass
3/22/24  
Report Pass
3/22/24  
Report Pass
4/10/24  
Refer
4/4/24  
Refer
4/4/24  
Engrossed
5/8/24  
Report Pass
4/10/24  
Report Pass
4/10/24  
Engrossed
5/8/24  

Caption

An Act Concerning Fees For Copying, Reviewing And Redacting Records Created By Police Body-worn Recording Equipment And Dashboard Cameras.

Impact

If enacted, SB00431 will overhaul the regulatory structure concerning fees that public agencies may charge when fulfilling records requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Specifically, it allows agencies to charge for redaction costs based on the time required to redact sensitive information before public disclosure. Importantly, the bill introduces fee waivers for certain individuals, such as involved persons in recordings or the parents/guardians of minors depicted in footage.

Summary

SB00431 aims to revise the provisions related to fees associated with copying, reviewing, and redacting records created by police body-worn cameras and dashboard cameras. The bill defines key terms relevant to the act, such as 'law enforcement unit,' 'body-worn recording equipment,' and 'dashboard camera,' establishing clear expectations for police departments regarding the use of these technologies. The act is primarily focused on enhancing public access to police recordings while balancing the need for privacy and confidentiality, particularly in sensitive situations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB00431 appears to be cautiously optimistic, as it aims to improve transparency in law enforcement practices while ensuring that individuals' privacy rights are protected. Stakeholders such as civil rights advocates are generally supportive of measures that enhance public access to police recordings. However, there are concerns about the potential for abuse of the redaction fee system and the implications it may have on public access to information. The bill's provisions are seen as a step toward addressing these concerns and enhancing accountability in policing.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the balance between public transparency and individual privacy. Critics argue that while the bill seeks to ensure that records are accessible, the fee structure could become a barrier for individuals seeking justice or clarification regarding police actions. Councils representing law enforcement may also express concerns regarding the administrative burden imposed by additional compliance and reporting mandates introduced under the bill. Overall, the discussion highlights the ongoing debate about accountability in policing and the mechanisms of public oversight.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT SB01222

An Act Concerning Fees For Copying, Reviewing And Redacting Records Created By Police Body-worn Recording Equipment And Dashboard Cameras.

CT HB06840

An Act Expanding Membership Of The Police Officer Standards And Training Council.

CT SB00973

An Act Permitting Redaction Fees For The Disclosure Of Records Created By Police Body-worn Recording Equipment Or Dashboard Cameras Under The Freedom Of Information Act.

CT SB01229

An Act Concerning Fees For Copying, Reviewing And Redacting Records Created By Police Body-worn Recording Equipment And Dashboard Cameras.

CT HB06004

An Act Concerning Police Accountability.

CT HB07308

An Act Concerning Camera And Recording Devices And Equipment Used By Police.

CT HB06754

An Act Concerning Reimbursement For The Purchase Of Body-worn Electronic Recording Equipment.

WV HB2002

Establishing One Stop Shop Permitting Process