Florida Sunshine Laws Under Attack
Dr. Sandra Chance

While the U.S. Congress was busy passing the new USA Patriot Act, which allows the government to establish secret courts, collect all kinds of private information, keep even more secrets, and suspend important parts of the Bill of Rights, Florida's legislature was working hard not to be outdone. In the process, Florida's government-in-the-sunshine laws came close to being the next casualty in the U.S. war on terrorism during the last special session. Unfortunately, many of the measures which didn't pass in December are currently being considered by our state legislators.

No one disputes the need, in these difficult and uncertain times, for state and local governments to take extra security measures to protect the public health and safety. However, Florida's legislature considered what could only be called Draconian measures that went far beyond any legitimate need to safeguard the public interest. Not only were many of the proposals contrary to Florida's tradition of openness, they were hastily considered, rarely debated and passed with blinding speed.

In November, Florida's Legislature was called into a special session to deal with a projected budget deficient. Legislators, however, added a number of new exemptions to Florida's Government-in-the-Sunshine laws to an already full agenda.

This came as a surprise as the state's Sunshine laws already contain many safeguards to prohibit disclosure of sensitive police intelligence and security plans. Before the special session began, law enforcement officials had the means to withhold information that might compromise investigations or endanger the public.

Despite this, at least a dozen bills were introduced during the special session and the Senate changed its rules to allow for secret meetings. The new rule authorizes the state's 40 senators to meet in secret to discuss terrorism prevention. The initial proposal by the Senate Rules Committee would have allowed the Senate president to call secret meetings and keep senators' votes secret as well. The new rule requires the Senate to keep a record of any closed meeting. However, the Senate president could seal the records and they would remain sealed until a Senate president authorized their release. According to reports on the voice vote, the rule changes passed almost unanimously, with only one vote against them.

This rule allows closed Senate sessions for the first time in more than 30 years and flies in the face of Florida's constitutional amendment guaranteeing open meetings and records. Obviously, senators need to be reminded that our state Open Meetings Law came as a direct result of the Senate's closed meetings to discuss reapportionment in the 1960s.

Reapportionment will dominate the next legislative session. Floridians will be watching closely. That is, if the Senate doesn't change its rules again to make those meetings secret, too.

The Senate also considered bills that would have given law enforcement officials broad exemptions to the state's public records laws and give the state police more powers to detain suspected terrorists. In addition, the Senate seriously considered a bill that would have allowed state police to temporarily detain a material witness for up to four days and shield its actions from the Public Records Law.

Much to its credit, the House did not amend its meeting rules. In addition, House Speaker Tom Feeney encouraged representatives to resist making significant changes to the open government laws in the rushed special session. Fortunately, for the most part, reason prevailed over political maneuvering and pandering to public fear. As a result, the House passed four new exemptions to the Public Records Law.

The Governor quickly signed the bills into law. The new laws make secret the location of drugs stockpiled to counter bioterrorists attacks, emergency security plans for hospitals and state buildings, security system plans, and police requests for records from other agencies. For the most part, the new laws clarify and expand existing exemptions to explicitly cover security issues.

Given the current climate, it's understandable that legislators, working hard to protect citizens, would support any measure that might ensure security and prevent further terrorists attacks.

However, many of the measures introduced and quickly passed were radical reactions to an obviously difficult situation. One has to wonder whether some of the state's legislators were hiding behind the understandable public fear of terrorism as they attempted to gut one of the country's strongest Sunshine laws. Many of these bills will be considered within the next few weeks.

Legislators were unable to provide any evidence that access truly compromises safety. In reality, just the opposite may be true. Access to public records since the Sept. 11 attacks has given the public valuable insight into governmental actions, where and how to strengthen state and national security systems, and emergency and public health response programs. This information is vital to ensuring our ability to hold our government officials accountable for the decisions they made before Sept. 11 and the decisions they'll make in the wake of the terrorists' attacks.

Come to think of it, maybe that's what some legislators are afraid of.

Back to Top