When the opportunity to testify about HB 520 was presented on February 27, I was in an LRC office receiving assistance from security after experiencing a freakish medical emergency.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/record/25rs/hb520.html
I cannot explain this medical "event" except to say that I was not at all well earlier in the day and the circumstances increasingly overwhelmed me.
No one testified against HB 520.
This does not mean that the Kentucky Open Government Coalition's concerns have been assuaged. Indeed, after watching the archived video of the sponsor's comments, those concerns are greater than ever.
https://www.youtube.com/live/f-5Rn_Bt7oU?si=lBmH6PfzZSDrywLF
The prospect of the return to a pre-City of Fort Thomas v Cincinnati Enquirer (2013) misinterpretation of the law — poised to become codified law through a revision that is unapologetically prompted by Shively Police Department v Courier Journal, Inc. (2024) — is disheartening, to say the very least.
More on that soon.
The net effect? Law enforcement agencies will be the only public agencies that are, in cases where excepted and nonexcepted materials are commingled,
relieved of the duty to separate the excepted and make the nonexcepted material available for examination" -- a fundamental statutory duty.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=54126
Two legislators courageously voted against the bill, exemplifying its unifying force among people of opposing political stripes. Those legislators were Anne Gay Donworth (D-Lexington) and Savannah Maddox (R-Dry Ridge). Our thanks to them for their refusal to rubber stamp a bill whose consequences have not yet begun to be explored.
A third representative, Joshua Watkins (D-Louisville) distinguished himself by asking precisely the right questions in an attempt to at least commence vetting HB 520.
Watkins asked how the bill balances the interest in avoiding disclosure of a record that might compromise the investigation against the interest in keeping the public informed about what law enforcement is doing and about threats to the community -- especially during lengthy investigations.
Additionally, Rep. Watkins asked the sponsor about safeguards to ensure that modification of the law won’t be perceived as a means of concealing police misconduct — especially in communities like the one he represents where police mistrust is high.
We urge Rep. Watkins — and other representatives — to pursue this line of questioning when HB 520 is debated on the House Floor on Tuesday. It is posted for passage in the Regular Orders of the Day for Tuesday, March 04.
