Ark. bill on accident reports faces FOI opposition

LITTLE ROCK A proposal before Arkansas lawmakers to restrict the public's access to motor vehicle accident reports for three months after a crash faces growing opposition from news organizations, Freedom of Information advocates and the state's top attorney.

Attorney General Dustin McDaniel said Friday he opposes the measure, which passed the Senate this week and is pending before a House Committee. The Associated Press and other news organizations have also said they object to the legislation.

The bill's sponsor said the proposal is intended to protect accident victims from harassment after a crash, but McDaniel said he's concerned about the constitutionality of closing off the reports to all but a small group of people. "From a policy standpoint, I do not favor exclusions in public access to public records. Accident reports are basic public records," McDaniel said.

The legislation from Sen. Denny Altes would make accident reports confidential for 90 days after a crash and would prevent using the reports for "commercial solicitation." The reports would be open to those involved in the accident, lawyers representing those involved, authorities, insurance agents of those involved in the crash and prosecutors.

The bill would also keep the accident reports open to newspapers and radio and television stations and says that commercial solicitation does not include publication by any news media. The exemptions, however, don't include wire services such as The Associated Press or Web-only publications. The bill also defines newspapers as publications that are published at least once a week and have at least four pages of five columns each, a restriction that would exclude tabloid-size newspapers.

"We see the bill as drafted as unconstitutional because it appears to discriminate against certain types of news media," said Dale Leach, Associated Press chief of bureau for Arkansas. "On the one hand, the proposed legislation attempts to make clear that news media would have access to accident reports in a timely manner," Leach said. "But in defining media, the bill's language would seem to eliminate some news organizations, including The Associated Press."

Max Brantley, editor of the weekly Arkansas Times newspaper, said he's concerned about the bill's definition of newspapers but said he's even more concerned about its overall restrictions on what is currently a public record. The Times currently publishes a tabloid-sized paper.

"I don't believe in creating classes of customers for public information," Brantley said.

Altes said he proposed the bill to prevent victims of car crashes from being harassed by lawyers, chiropractors, body shops and others after an accident. He said he'd like to see the bill possibly amended to allow other news organizations access to the reports but said he still wants to restrict who can see the reports.

"It's restricted to anybody who doesn't need it. Anybody that needs it, you're going to have access to it," said Altes, R-Fort Smith.

Roy Ockert Jr., editor of the Jonesboro Sun and president of the Arkansas Press Association's board of directors, said the measure's restrictions would be "terrible" for the public, not just news organizations.

"(An accident report) should not be confidential from any citizen after being filed, and making such reports partially confidential is a violation of the spirit of our sunshine in government law," Ockert wrote in an editorial in his paper this week. "While we appreciate the exemption written into the bill for certain newspapers and broadcasters, news organizations traditionally have defended the Arkansas FOIA as a law for all citizens, not just us."

The measure would require those requesting the reports to state in writing that the documents would not be examined, reproduced or used for commercial solicitation purposes.

Rick Peltz, an expert on the Freedom of Information Act, said the bill would also end up closing the records to much of the general public that may have legitimate reasons for viewing the records. He noted that, if passed, Arkansans couldn't find out about accidents in their neighborhood unless they met one of the exemptions spelled out.

"The main issue is it's restricting access to the public, and there's just no reason for that," said Peltz, a professor at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law School.

The bill passed the Senate this week on a 20-2 vote, with 13 members of the Senate not voting on the proposal.

The proposal is pending before the House Judiciary Committee, and the panel's chairman said he thinks there are enough votes to oppose the measure in committee. Rep. Steve Harrelson, D-Texarkana, said he's opposed to the proposal because he thinks it would violate the First Amendment and because he sees other constitutional problems with the restrictions.

"I've taken an oath to uphold the constitution and I think that's what I have to do, help defeat it," said Harrelson, who also runs a Web log. "That's what I'm trying to do, gather up enough 'no' votes to make sure it doesn't come out of committee."