As the state advances controversial bills that would limit public access to public agencies' records, a bill that would shroud parish economic development decisions is sparking further concern among government transparency advocates.
Rep. Steven Jackson, D-Shreveport, has said his bill is meant to protect local governments trying to attract businesses.
House Bill 461, panned by critics as overly broad, would shield from public view parish and municipal records documenting negotiations related to economic development. If the bill becomes law, such records could be kept secret for up to two years, and officials must publish online which negotiations’ records are confidential.
“HB 461 is a pro-Louisiana bill that strengthens the hand of local government as we work in a competitive environment to recruit and retain high quality and high paying jobs for Louisiana residents,” Jackson said in a statement. “If we wouldn’t accept Alabama, Auburn, or Arkansas knowing Brian Kelly’s playbook on a fall Saturday night in Tiger Stadium, why would we accept anything different with our approach to economic development?”
The bill has passed the full House. But Jackson deferred its consideration during a Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee meeting on Wednesday, when he said he was working to amend it following concerns from the media and the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, a good government group.
Jackson did not discuss the specifics of those amendments.
He told the panel that parishes and municipalities near the state border have sometimes run into problems when negotiating deals with businesses, as governments in Texas and Arkansas may request information about the negotiations and issue competing offers.
“We lose opportunities and jobs to other states and cities, and this bill would strengthen the hand of local economic development,” he said.
Transparency activists suggest the bill is too broad, and that citizens should be able to see negotiations as they unfold.
“When you put everything under economic development, that’s a large umbrella, and so it could really expand to a proposal to put a warehouse in your neighborhood, or any controversial facilities,” said Melia Cerrato, a sunshine legal fellow at Tulane’s First Amendment Clinic, adding that public insight into such negotiations can guard against favoritism, nepotism and backroom deals.
Steven Procopio, PAR’s president, said he understands the intent of Jackson’s bill, and that he does not oppose the lawmaker’s goal. But PAR has asked Jackson to amend the bill to prevent the public records exemption from being abused, Procopio said.
One suggestion would be to set a minimum dollar amount at which projects would be exempt, preventing local governments from keeping secret records about smaller, everyday deals, Procopio said. Another would require governments to declare which negotiations are exempt before they receive records requests, he said.
“We’re just trying to be a little bit careful, particularly given the atmosphere for public records right now,” Procopio said.
A similar economic development exemption already exists for records produced by the state’s economic development office, Louisiana Economic Development, and by the state’s 32 ports. But Jackson’s proposal would shield development-related records in all 64 Louisiana parishes and in over 300 municipalities.
This session, PAR has opposed a different proposal, Senate Bill 482, which would shield from public view emails, messages and other documents that state officials produce in the course of making government decisions. Another bill, Senate Bill 502, would require identification checks on people who make public records requests.
Both bills are in the hands of the Senate.