The Wisconsin Newspaper Association is proposing an amendment to a bill approved by the Assembly last week that would set limits on the public release of police body camera footage, arguing the proposed guidelines are too restrictive.

Sponsors of Assembly Bill 351 say the intent is to protect the rights of victims, witnesses and citizens who encounter police, but the WNA and other open government advocates are concerned the bill would prevent the release of most police body camera videos and eliminate a new avenue for public oversight of police activity.

The bill was approved Nov. 9 on a voice vote and now goes to the Senate. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety on Tuesday.

In its current form, the bill would make camera footage available under Wisconsin’s public records law only if it was taken in a public location and involved a death, injury, arrest or a search. If the footage was taken in “a location where an individual may have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” it could be released only when all victims, witnesses and owners of the property where the incident occurred approved of the video’s public release.

Attorney James Friedman, representing the WNA, said the proposed amendment offers five critical modifications to the bill.

“The first part of the amendment changes the list of persons to notify about a request for body camera data from ‘known victim or witness or an owner’ to ‘an individual whose image or voice appears on the data,’” Friedman said. “It seems to me those are the people who may have privacy concerns.”

Friedman said the second proposal in the amendment would shift the burden to stop a video’s public release onto the individuals in the video. The current version of the bill requires written permission from all individuals before the video could be released; the amendment would instead require a written request from individuals to withhold the video’s release.

The third proposal in the amendment would alter what happens when an individual does not respond to notifications that the records are being requested for release. Failing to respond would be interpreted as granting permission to release the record.

Friedman said the amendment would also change what happens when individuals attempt to stop the release of a video.

“Under the current draft, a denial or no response from an individual requires the custodian to deny the request,” Friedman said. “Under the new version, a written denial requires the custodian to make all reasonable efforts to redact the denying individual’s image or voice from the data before releasing it.  After attempting to redact, the custodian would apply the balancing test to the data, with the individual’s request and the result of the redaction effort expressly weighed in the balance.”

The final modification in the amendment would allow the person requesting the video’s release to challenge denials using procedures outlined in the state public records law.

In addition to the WNA, the amendment is also being supported by the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association.