A new bill would expand RI's APRA law. Here's what could become public record.

Lawmakers have filed a bill to update Rhode Island's Access to Public Records Act to expand access to certain public records, including emails from elected officials and police body-camera footage – and also boost fines on those who do not comply with the law.

Introduced by Sen. Louis DiPalma, D-Middletown, and Rep. Joseph J. Solomon Jr., D-Warwick, S 0420 and H 5454 were drafted in consultation with groups including the New England First Amendment Coalition, Common Cause Rhode Island, AccessRI, the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, the Rhode Island Press Association and the Rhode Island League of Women Voters.

"We need to figure out how to increase accountability in government," DiPalma said. "One way you do that is increase transparency."

DiPalma said that he'd experienced some of the challenges of obtaining public records firsthand in his previous role as the chair of the Senate Oversight Committee. He also noted that the Access to Public Records Act has not been updated in 10 years, and in that time "technology has certainly changed."

Here are some of the key changes being proposed:

Police body-cam footage, internal-affairs investigations, 911 calls would be public record

• All police body-cam footage would be considered a public record. Any recordings from incidents involving the use of force would need to be publicly available within 30 days, "notwithstanding the presence of an ongoing investigation into the incident."

• Any reports that come out of an investigation by a police department's internal-affairs division would be public. However, names, addresses and other personal identifiers "may be redacted from the reports to the extent that their disclosures would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." As currently written, the law doesn't prevent police departments from releasing those reports, but it doesn't explicitly state that they are considered public records.

• If a law enforcement officer has been engaged in misconduct that must be disclosed to prosecutors, that officer's name and the "underlying activity" must also be public. However, police departments cannot disclose any personally identifiable information that would violate the Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights.

• The bill also clarifies that the "initial narrative report" from an individual's arrest must be public. It also clarifies that a police report from an incident that did not lead to an arrest is not necessarily exempt from disclosure.

• Recordings of 911 calls could be released if there is "good cause" or a court order.

• Police departments at colleges and universities would be considered a public body and subject to record requests. That includes both campus police at public universities such as Rhode Island College and the University of Rhode Island, and those at private institutions such as Brown University or Salve Regina University, DiPalma said.

More: on body cams: More Rhode Island police to wear body cameras on patrol. Warwick launches pilot program

Subpoenas, emails would be considered public records

• Subpoenas issued to public bodies or public officials regarding official business would be public records.

• Currently, elected officials' correspondence is exempt from APRA. The bill would change that by exempting only correspondence "with or relating to" constituents, or correspondence "that has no demonstrable connection to the exercise of official acts or duties." Communications involving other government employees, such as agency or department heads, are already public records.

• Any documents that are to be discussed at a public meeting would need to be included with the agenda that's submitted to the Secretary of State's office and available on the Open Meetings website.

• The bill also clarifies that documents "reviewed" or "considered" at a public meeting are considered public records. (The law already makes clear that documents "submitted" at a public meeting are public records.)

Fines for violating APRA by withholding records would go up

• The bill would require agencies that are withholding documents or redacting a portion of a document to cite the relevant statute that allows them to do so, and to "explain how disclosure would damage the interests protected by the claimed exemption."

• Fines for violating the Access to Public Records Act would increase: The maximum fine for "willful" violations would go from $2,000 to $10,000, and the maximum fine for "recklessly" violating the law would go from $1,000 to $3,000. A judge would also be able to levy a $100 fine for each day that records were "improperly held."

• Public bodies could not charge for the redaction of documents, or for a request that is denied.

• Currently, public bodies have 10 days to either produce records or inform the requester that they need an additional 20 days to do so. Under the changes proposed in the bill, they would not be able to deviate from those response times without the explicit written consent of the requester.

• The unavailability of a public records officer would not be considered "good cause" for failing to produce records in this time frame.

• If a public body says it needs an additional 20 days to comply with a request because of the number of other pending records requests, it would need to specify exactly how many requests are pending.

Standardizing the APRA request process

• Every public body would be required to have a link to their procedure for submitting a public records request "prominently displayed" on the homepage of its website.

• Public bodies would be required to accept records requests by email, fax, or regular mail, and in-person. (Believe it or not, some public bodies still aren't accepting requests by email.)

• If a records request is sent to someone other than the designated records custodian, the recipient would be responsible for forwarding it to the appropriate person or department. The public body would have five additional days to respond to the request.

• When requested, agencies would need to provide digital data in "a format allowing the documents to be searchable electronically where feasible."

• Copying charges would be reduced from 15 cents per page to 5 cents per page.

This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: APRA expansion bill could make body cam footage, 911 calls public record