“Public institutions like Rutgers need more openness and transparency, not less!”
Picket and Press Availability: Friday, March 8, 2 p.m.
Assembly Member Joe Danielsen’s office, 334 Elizabeth Ave., Somerset, NJ
NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ— Union members at Rutgers University will gather at Assembly Member Joe Danielsen’s office Friday, March 8, at 2 p.m. to show their opposition to legislation sponsored by Danielsen and state Senator Paul Sarlo that would undermine the New Jersey Open Public Records Act (OPRA), gutting some of the law’s most important provisions.
The legislation—which is being fast-tracked to rush it through the legislature—would make it easier for local governments and state institutions like Rutgers University to avoid public scrutiny, said Todd Wolfson, president of Rutgers AAUP-AFT, which represents some 6,000 full-time faculty, graduate workers, postdocs, and counselors.
“Public institutions like Rutgers need more openness and transparency, not less,” Wolfson said. “Danielsen’s bill would allow officials to reject legitimate requests for public records from citizens and media outlets that routinely rely on the law. If Assembly Member Danielsen doesn’t do the right thing and withdraw this harmful legislation, we won’t forget. Our unions will support a primary challenge against him in the next election.”
Rutgers unions have had to use OPRA requests repeatedly to uncover the facts about everything from the administration’s budget system, to the “financial black hole” of Rutgers Athletics, to the procedures of the Board of Governors. Media outlets depend on OPRA to uncover documents and information that they and the public have a right to review.
Bryan Sacks, president of the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union, which represents 2,800 lecturers, said the law is critical to democracy in New Jersey. “Public access to government records is a cornerstone of our democracy and the ability of the press to scrutinize those who hold power,” Sacks said. “Our unions also rely on OPRA to hold the Rutgers administration accountable to our members, our students, and our communities.”
Democracy advocates single out these changes in the bill as among the most alarming, according to a New Jersey Monitor report: agencies would be allowed to exempt records and seek a protective court order if the requests are deemed harassing, an extremely vague definition; “draft” documents could be made private, a provision that could be abused to deny access; email logs would be exempted from requests; and a now-mandatory rule requiring public agencies that lose records disputes in court to pay the winning parties’ legal fees.
“The key part of the bill is that it would really hinder the right to sue for records since it makes it harder to recover legal fees. A credible threat of litigation is the only way Rutgers ever gives us information,” said Diomedes Tsitiouras, executive director of AAUP-BHSNJ, which represents over 1,000 Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences faculty. “We have sued Rutgers several times. Reporters have had to sue for the Rutgers Athletics spending deficit story. If we lose that right, it will be many months or years before we see any documents from the university, and by then, it will likely be too late.”
# # #