Changes could be coming to Utah’s Government Records Access and Management Act if state lawmakers get their way.
Sen. Mike McKell wants to eliminate the seven-member State Records Committee that currently arbitrates the appeals process for denied records requests. Instead, the group would be replaced by an attorney appointed by the governor who has “knowledge and experience relating to government records.”
According to McKell, SB277 would address a process that is, in his opinion, “simply too slow and too inefficient.”
“We have a significant increase in appeals” and the process is taking longer and longer, he said during a Feb. 18 Senate committee hearing. “The workload is becoming more significant, more difficult and we need to be responsive to that.”
In 2012, the Republican said there were 26 appeals. Fast forward to 2024, he said the committee heard 85 appeals.
Passed in 1991, GRAMA gives the public access to information maintained by state and local governmental entities. This allows everyone from journalists to everyday Utahns to request records, such as police reports and correspondence between elected officials, as well as data obtained by state agencies. It also details guidelines for managing that access and in some cases restricting it when a request seeks sensitive or private information.
Consolidating the current committee into one role would not only speed up the appeals process, McKell said, it would also increase transparency because a lawyer would be held to a higher ethical standard than the current committee.
“You could bring an ethical complaint with the state bar with an attorney,” he said. “That enhances, to me, the confidence in that individual.”
Not everyone was on board with McKell’s vision for the future of public records appeals. The bill faced near unanimous opposition during public comment with many pointing to the need for a diversity of viewpoints on the records committee.
“The current committee includes members with diverse backgrounds, including citizen members and a member who represents the news media,” said Saratoga Springs resident Ashley Lee. “Is there a way to increase the committee's legal experience or expertise without excluding the other viewpoints on the committee?”
Others expressed concern about consolidating power to just one person who is a paid employee of the state. Under the current bill, the appointed attorney would be subject to removal by the governor “with or without cause.”
“Currently the SRC members are appointed to a four-year term, and they serve independently without fear that their decisions will result in a loss of their livelihoods,” said attorney John Gadd. “If you pass this bill, the governor can remove the director without cause at any time. If you do this, I fear that the director will be too beholden to the governor and will be afraid to rule against the governor or lt. governor for fear of immediately losing his or her job and livelihood.”
McKell asked the committee to trust that further changes would be made as the legislative process continues.
“I appreciate the comments, I appreciate the public being here,” he said. “I am committed to continue working on this issue.”
An earlier version of McKell’s bill would have also done away with the “balancing test” used to determine whether a record should be released to the public. In short, the test requires officials to release protected records if it’s determined that the public interest is greater than or equal to the reasons for keeping it secret.
“There is a policy discussion on the balancing test that we want to continue to have,” he said but noted it would not be a part of this bill.
Lawmakers attempted sweeping changes to the state’s open records law in 2011 but eventually repealed those after backlash from Utahns of all political stripes.
McKell’s bill advanced out of committee and now heads to the full Senate for debate.
