Wisconsin Senate Bill SB117

Wisconsin 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/8/23
• Refer: 3/8/23
• Report Pass: 4/13/23
• Engrossed: 4/19/23
• Refer: 3/14/24
• Failed: 4/15/24

Caption

Obtaining attorney fees and costs under the state's public records law when an authority voluntarily or unilaterally releases a contested record after an action has been filed in court.

Impact

If enacted, SB117 would have a significant impact on how public records are accessed and the accountability of governmental bodies in Wisconsin. By altering the prevailing standard, the bill aims to increase transparency by ensuring that individuals who seek access to public documents are acknowledged for their efforts even if compliance is achieved without direct court intervention. Thus, the public might face fewer barriers in accessing essential records, reinforcing the ideal that government actions should remain transparent and accountable to its citizens.

Summary

Senate Bill 117 addresses the issue of obtaining attorney fees and costs under Wisconsin's public records law. Specifically, the bill seeks to redefine what constitutes a successful 'prevailing' request when a person invokes the law to access public records. It introduces a standard whereby a requester may be deemed to have prevailed either through a judicial order, a written agreement, or if public records are voluntarily released by the authority after a legal action has commenced. This shift in definition effectively aligns state law more closely with the standards found in the federal Freedom of Information Act, streamlining access to public records.

Contention

Notably, the bill exists in the context of a recent Wisconsin Supreme Court decision (Friends of Frame Park) that limited who could be considered 'prevailing' in public records disputes. Advocates for SB117 argue that the amendments are necessary to restore a more reasonable and equitable framework for individuals seeking information, as the current law potentially disincentivizes individuals from pursuing claims against public authorities. Opponents may express concerns that the bill could lead to an overload of requests from individuals who feel emboldened by the more lenient standards for prevailing, potentially overwhelming public agencies tasked with record management.