Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB837

Wisconsin 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/22/23
• Refer: 12/22/23
• Refer: 1/18/24
• Report Pass: 2/13/24
• Refer: 2/13/24
• Failed: 4/15/24

Caption

Fees for redacting certain records of law enforcement agencies. (FE)

Impact

The enactment of AB837 would effectively modify state statutes dealing with public access to records held by law enforcement agencies. By legitimizing the charging of fees specifically for redaction efforts, the bill could impact the overall cost for individuals or organizations making public records requests. It introduces a potential barrier to transparency, as applicants may be dissuaded from requesting records due to the associated costs of redaction. The bill aims to protect both public interests and sensitive data, while also addressing the financial responsibilities of law enforcement agencies in complying with public records laws.

Summary

Assembly Bill 837, introduced in the 2023-2024 legislative session, seeks to amend the current protocol surrounding fees that law enforcement agencies can charge for redacting records in response to public records requests. The proposed legislation allows these agencies to impose a fee that reflects the 'actual, necessary, and direct cost' associated with the redaction process, including techniques such as pixelization to safeguard sensitive information. This marks a shift from a pre-existing structure where fees were primarily linked to costs incurred for searching, copying, and mailing records.

Contention

While supporters argue that this bill is a necessary adjustment to ensure that law enforcement agencies are not financially burdened by the costs associated with redacting sensitive information, critics may contend that allowing such fees could limit access to public records. Opponents of the bill might perceive it as a mechanism that could diminish transparency in government operations, especially for those who may already struggle with accessing public information due to bureaucratic hurdles. This dynamic sets the stage for an ongoing debate about the balance between transparency and privacy in government record-keeping.