Lawmakers want to keep government secret

The door to local government meetings could be closing and more government records could be kept private.

While they say they support government transparency, several state lawmakers have introduced legislation that would allow public bodies to conduct business in secret and withhold certain information from the public — or make the public wait longer to receive it.

Interested in quickly learning the name of a police officer who shot someone? State lawmakers may make you wait up to 90 days.

Want to hear public officials debate issues in your child's school or at city hall? Elected officials may soon be able to talk about them behind closed doors.

Want to know the name of the person who just won the Arizona Lottery? Too bad. Lawmakers have advanced a bill that would force you to wait 90 days after winners claim their prizes.

Lawmakers who support restricting access say the public already has enough government information and the bills are intended to help elected officials talk frankly about controversial ideas without the glare of news cameras. Lawmakers also say the legislation would thwart attempts to embarrass and harass law-enforcement officials and former judges and avoid burdensome requests for information.

Arizona law allows the public to attend most meetings where government functions are discussed and allows the public to obtain information about government activities.

Constitutional attorney Dan Barr, of the First Amendment Coalition of Arizona, said the proposals would make it more difficult to scrutinize officials' performance.

"We're the bosses of these people ... and we give limited power to our elected representatives to do our work and the only way that we can fully participate in a democracy is to have some transparency to see what they're doing," he said. "Not only because they could be doing stupid things or there could be corruption, but frankly it leads to better government. What they're proposing is actually counterproductive to what they're trying to achieve, which is better government."

One bill would dramatically scale back the state's Open Meeting Law so the public could only attend gatherings of school boards, city councils, county supervisors, the Legislature and other public bodies if "action is taken." Republican Sen. Sylvia Allen, of Snowflake, introduced Senate Bill 1435; 13 other lawmakers co-sponsored it.

Allen did not respond to The Arizona Republic's request for comment but has said residents would still be allowed to attend the most important activity on an issue: the vote.

Sen. Bob Worsley, a Mesa lawmaker who supports the bill, said the state's Open Meeting Law hampers public officials' discussions.

"I have heard just really painful stories over at the Corporation Commission, where they're unable to sit down and discuss things without violating these rules," he said. "My reason for signing on was really in concern for those folks — that they have a chance without all the limelight to really discuss issues."

Chris Moeser, an attorney for The Republic, said the bill would "gut" the Open Meeting Law.

"It really doesn't allow the public to see what happens," Moeser said. "It basically allows everything to be done in a back room without public review."

Last week, the Senate approved a bill that keeps secret the names of lottery winners for 90 days after they claim their money. Sponsor Republican Sen. John Kavanagh said the proposal would give winners time to seek financial advice and make security arrangements in case criminals plan to kidnap them. Already, winners can remain anonymous for about six months: They have 180 days from the drawing date to claim their prize.

"Please name me the last five lottery winners — and if you can't then it's probably not necessary to know," Kavanagh said. He got the idea after a Fountain Hills man struck it rich in the Powerball two years ago and wished to remain anonymous; his name was released under the Arizona public records law.

"This gives them time to set up security," Kavanagh said, adding he recalled thinking, "These guys' kids might get kidnapped. What a horrible thing. Do we really need to have his name plastered everywhere?" The legislation now goes to the House for action.

Kavanagh is also pushing SB 1300, which would keep secret the recorded video from body cameras worn by law-enforcement officers unless a court order or a subpoena is issued. The public could get footage of incidents involving the "use or attempted use of deadly physical force" if law-enforcement agencies agree to release it.

Kavanagh says he wants to prevent the footage from being exploited by websites "that post embarrassing information" about law-enforcement officials and suspects.

"We don't want to turn every cop into an inadvertent camera man for reality TV," he said. "This is a whole new phenomenon of police carrying cameras. Right off the start we need to say, 'Only some of this is public information.' "

Moeser said such legislation would "breed suspicion of the police."

"People tend to suspect what they can't see," Moeser said.

Lawmakers also want to shield for 90 days the names of police involved in potentially deadly incidents. The names could be released earlier if the officer agrees, if a criminal investigation ends or if the officer has been arrested or charged.

Sen. Steve Smith, R-Maricopa, says he introduced SB 1445 to prevent death threats and harassment of officers involved in shootings: "It doesn't mean they're going to hide facts," Smith said, adding that 90 days is enough time to get the officer counseling "and in some sort of a witness protection-type thing."

The Phoenix Law Enforcement Association supports the measure, which lobbyist Mike Williams said provided a "cooling off period," needed to avoid the type of unrest that occurred in Ferguson, Mo., following the deadly shooting of an unarmed Black teen by a White police officer.

Smith also introduced legislation that would allow former judges to keep private addresses and phone numbers after complaints by a retired judge.

State lawmakers are also pushing measures purportedly designed to protect Department of Child Safety workers from retribution from family members angry with the department's actions.

Rep. John Allen, R-Phoenix, tempered his "yes" vote by saying the state appears to be applying privacy provisions piecemeal.

"Even our employees have been threatened at times," he said. "We need to look at a kind of universal way of dealing with these (exemptions). You can understand, people have real fears of what their job brings them."

Some lawmakers also want to prevent release of candidate addresses and limit harassing requests for government information that officials deem burdensome.

Gov. Doug Ducey and his staff had not yet reviewed the bills, his spokesman said last week. In a statement, Daniel Scarpinato said the governor "believes in open and transparent government and is committed to ensuring the public has access to information they have a legal right to see."