The biennial budget that the Ohio Senate passed backed off a proposal that would have increased the number of exemptions to the state’s public records law.
While proponents said the idea would safeguard the legal process, critics said the measure would have specifically affected the public’s access to police files and would represent a significant change in the public’s right to access government information. The Senate bill would still expand exemptions, but not as broadly as the House initially proposed in its version of the state budget.
The change would have barred the public from seeing police records until a suspect has finished the appeals process, effectively keeping most police records off-limits for years or decades. The provision appears to respond to a 2022 Ohio Supreme Court ruling that found supplemental police reports, including witness statements and officers’ initial impressions, are public records.
“If that stuff is subject to public records requests, it increases the risk of witness intimidation and increases the likelihood that people aren’t going to cooperate with an investigator,” Cleveland.com quoted Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association Executive Director Lou Tobin as saying in June.
“And so, both sides should have the same information through the end of the appeal that they had throughout the trial. We’re just trying to level the playing field,” Local 12/WKRC-TV quoted Tobin as saying in May. “It’s going to increase the risk of error. And that’s not good for us. It’s not good for the defendant. It’s not good for victims. It’s not good for the public. So, our primary goal was to make sure our attorney work product is protected.”
However, opponents said it will make it more challenging to exonerate someone wrongly convicted.
“The wrong person can be convicted; that happens. And to limit the public’s accessibility to this stuff for no good reason that I can discern doesn’t make a lot of sense,” Local 12/WKRC-TV quoted Cincinnati public access lawyer Jack Greiner.
“You could have an ongoing pattern, maybe with somebody who, you know, basically gets away with misconduct, and the public would have very little ability to discover that. And that’s a problem,” Greiner added, per the station’s report.
Martin D. Yant, an author, licensed private investigator, and journalist from Columbus, was among those who opposed tightening public records laws. He told lawmakers he has “helped free over 30 wrongly convicted.”
“Use of the Ohio public records law has played a major role in many of my Ohio exoneration cases,” Yant told lawmakers in prepared testimony. “Had I not been able to obtain records that had previously been concealed, many of those innocent inmates would still be suffering in prison for crimes they did not commit.”
The Senate’s version of the state’s two-year spending plan, which passed by a 23-10 margin, called for roughly $89.8 billion in General Revenue Fund appropriations and about $201.3 billion in total spending. The centerpiece may be the decision to adopt a flat 2.75% income tax.
However, the budget is not without controversy.
Another provision in the Senate’s proposed budget that has garnered slightly less enthusiasm is a $600 million handout for a new $3.4 billion Cleveland Browns stadium in Brook Park. Instead of using state-backed bonds for funding, as the House proposed, the Senate calls for allocating $1.7 billion from $3.7 billion in unclaimed funds to establish a new “Sports and Culture Facilities Fund.”
A conference committee must determine the differences between the House’s and the Senate’s versions of the budgets. Republican Gov. Mike DeWine must sign the budget by June 30.
