Public access 1-13-15

Unnecessary new law violates spirit of public access

By Roy Ockert Jr.

Jan. 13, 2015

Act 1229 of 2013, which narrows public access to traffic accident reports, is a good example of knee-jerk lawmaking passed blindly by an inexperienced Legislature that doesn’t consider the full consequences of its actions.

As a result of the law, which took effect Jan. 1, Arkansas State Police officials are refusing requests for accident reports unless the requestor can specify the date of the accident, county in which it occurred and the name of at least one person involved in the accident.

Among other things, that makes it almost impossible for news organizations to gather information about wrecks. We make such requests to find out what happened. If you don’t know an accident happened, as well as where and who was involved, you can’t get the information.

ASP officials say they’ve had to prohibit such “bulk inspection” of public records because they lack the manpower to redact information on minors for the thousands of requests for reports they receive. Therefore, they won’t grant any such requests.

That in itself is a violation of state law, which still says “all traffic accident investigating officers’ reports are public records and [shall] be open to public inspection at all reasonable times.”

Although the agency has had more than a year to prepare for implementation of this law, it was placed in a position of needing more manpower to carry out a new regulation or violating the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. Funny how many new regulations our conservative Legislature is churning out, isn’t it?

Act 1229 is the brainchild of state Sen. Eddie Joe Williams, R-Cabot, who thought it was necessary because of one — yes, one — accident. That was a wreck involving a Cabot school bus about three years ago involving only minor injuries.

Williams explained to an Arkansas News Bureau reporter that afterward children were receiving letters from lawyers and chiropractors “and in those letters they were stating they could be injured and not even know it.” That was such a grievous circumstance Williams sponsored Senate Bill 225 requiring law enforcement agencies to redact the names of any minor driver or occupant under the age of 18 from public inspection except for the parent, legal guardian or legal custodian of the minor or a representative of an insurance company representing a person involved in the accident.

Presumably, that even means the name of a juvenile killed in an accident must be withheld.

Therefore, if a kid who is texting smashes into your vehicle, you don’t have a right to know who it was unless you get your insurance company involved. And no one else is privy to that knowledge.

Williams justifies his legislation by pointing out that it encountered no opposition. Indeed, it passed the House of Representatives 90-0 with 10 not voting and the Senate 33-0 with two not voting (including Williams).

But it’s not true there was no opposition. Williams declined an invitation to meet with the FOI Coalition, a group of news organization representatives and legal experts, and the Arkansas Press Association recommended “do not pass.” Representatives testified against it in committee.

Coincidentally, a few days after the Senate passed SB 225, Robert S. McCord, known as the “father of FOI” in Arkansas, died. In a column of tribute to Bob, who had served on the coalition until the last few years of his life, I pointed out that Gov. Mike Beebe had SB 225 on his desk. It was one of a never-ending line of bills chipping away at the public access law McCord helped write, I said, urging the governor to veto the bill. Alas, it was too late.

If Williams had met with the coalition, he might have learned the full implications of his “quick fix.” He also would have been advised of a less onerous solution — simply banning the use of accident reports for commercial solicitations.

On the other hand, what’s so wrong with a person involved in a traffic accident getting a few letters from lawyers and chiropractors? You can easily toss those in “file 13,” but it might be helpful to know your rights and get some information about who could help. Your own insurance company is not necessarily the most objective source at such times.

Act 1229 does not prevent commercial solicitations of anyone else involved in a traffic accident.

Even if some people are inconvenienced after an accident, that’s not sufficient cause to restrict access to everyone. Publishing the name of a juvenile involved in an accident is hardly the same thing as revealing the name of one accused of crime or disclosing one’s academic record. In such cases the record isn’t public and shouldn’t be, but a traffic report is public. Why create a new regulation requiring new bureaucracy to hide some information without sufficient cause?

News organizations may have a “work-around” that will allow them to make requests for some accident reports. The State Police post preliminary summaries for fatal accidents, providing enough information to make a formal request for the full report, when available.

Local agencies will respond in a variety of ways, and some already have. A spokesman for the Fayetteville Police Department said reports with juveniles are being placed in a separate file not accessible to the public.

The Legislature should rethink Act 1229, which violates the spirit of freedom of information.

Roy Ockert is editor emeritus of The Jonesboro Sun. He may be reached by e-mail at royo@suddenlink.net.