Proposed transparency legislation
| ||||
| Find your State | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
|
This is a list of proposed transparency legislation categories. As new trends are identified, new pages will be added.
- Proposed transparency legislation, Personal privacy exemptions legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Open meetings legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Deadline legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Exemption legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Private agencies legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Affirmative disclosure requirements
- Proposed transparency legislation, New media transparency
- Proposed transparency legislation, FOIA process legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Penalties and violations legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Records commissions legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, 911 exemptions
- Proposed transparency legislation, Deliberative process legislation
- Proposed transparency legislation, Executive session legislation
| |
|
| ||||
| Find your State | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
|
Changes in 2011
See: Proposed reforms in state sunshine laws, 2011
Changes in 2010
See: Proposed reforms in state sunshine laws, 2010
Changes in 2009
See: Proposed transparency legislation, 2009
Changes in 2008
New York's FOIL
Several changes to New York's FOIL went into effect on August 7, 2008.[1].
The changes include limits on fees that can be charged individuals for electronic records, provisions regarding large requests, and for new records created from electronic information systems. A new subparagraph clarifies that access to records to ascertain the fairness of real property tax assessments is not an invasion of others' privacy.[2] When government agencies install new information management systems, they are now legally required to build systems that provide maximum public access.[3]
Rhode Island's law
Rhode Island's Access to Public Records Act was amended in 2008 to reduce the number of days available to public agencies have to respond to public requests for records. The bill also better details the types of arrest record information police departments must release and when that information must be released.[4]
Tennessee's law
Tennessee's Open Records Act was amended in 2008 to requiresstate records custodians to respond to records requests within seven days. The new law also outlines the duties of the new state open records ombudsman, who must set a reasonable fee schedule for extensive records requests, among other things.[5]
Changes in 2007
Minnesota
Minnesota's Data Practices Act underwent a number of revisions in 2007, most of which were minor, technical fixes.[6].
