♪ Major funding >> presented by, our date -- our date Rowan University.

Partnering with New Jersey businesses, transforming of New Jersey's future.

Promotional support provided by New Jersey business magazine.

A magazine for the New Jersey business Association reporting to executive and legislative leaders and all the counties of the garden state since 1954 and by politicos New Jersey playbook, a topical newsletter on garden state politics.

♪ Host: don't look now, or ever if lawmakers in Trenton get their way.

Hello, everyone, it is "Reporters Roundtable."

Our panel of nosy reporters this week includes Charles Stile, columnist for the record, Daniel for Politico MJ and --.

We will hear from the panel in just a bit but let's start today with a discussion about a bill that is on the fast track in the legislature for some reason.

Senate Bill 293 zero, a bill to reform the open Public records act set for committee hearings on Monday.

And for us in the newsgathering business, here to talk about the finer points of government opacity is CJ Griffin, partner at passions Stein who specializes in this stuff.

Good to see you again.

>> good to see you again.

Host: this is a bill from Senator Charla.

Let's start with the rationale behind it.

What problem is this bill supposed to solve?

>> it is supposedly solving a problem of commercial requests to public agencies selling access.

The league and entity supporting this bill have had months to come up with examples of what those commercial requests are and they have not done so.

We are still relying on anecdotes.

This bill is full of puns about things that have nothing to do with it.

Host: ostensibly, they are getting so many requests from people that want to know who has a dog license or who took out a permit for XYZ thing that it is overwhelming towns?

>> I guess that is what they are arguing but when it comes to permits or land use records, the public needs those to purchase homes.

It is kind of quintessential government 101.

One of the things the bill does is bands data brokers or entities who want to resell a public record from doing so.

That is going to backfire on them because right now when you or I purchased a home, our attorneys will access databases and the title company will access databases or publish their own and those services to us allow us to not have to file those requests.

Instead of now being able to access the title search company database, you'll have to buy your own request so custodians will have more work.

Host: it is the baby what the bathwater aspect of this that has a lot of people concerned.

Let's talk about some of the problems you are finding.

One, it extends the time the government has to fulfill the request as if they were not taking their time to begin with.

What is that going to do?

>> that one made me chuckle because their solution to commercial requests is to give the custodian 14 days.

We are happy if they respond in 14 days to a request.

They ignore the deadlines.

It is not a solution.

Host: and then there is the question of something called specific subject matter that ultimately serves to narrow and restrict searches, doesn't it?

>> for email correspondence, this is something that has nothing to do with commercial requests but will solely promote secrecy in government.

For email requests, they make it so much more difficult for the public to access those.

They will have to be very specific and almost know exactly what email the person sent in order to get that and we don't know that.

I spoke with reporters with so many stories over the last two years about how access to emails exposed a lot of wrongdoing so it makes sense that government agencies would want to hide their emails but that has nothing to do with commercial requests.

Host: it is why we are asking because we don't know they are also restricting access to draft material.

Why is that important?

>> that is important because public agencies label everything a draft to try to keep it from the public.

Courts have pushed back and now this codifies it.

It's as if something is a draft you cannot get it.

That means they might say something is a draft even if they are implementing a policy.

I believe it was last year there was an article about the Big Ten trying to keep documents from the public.

They said in the article, we label things as draft so we don't have to give it out and this codifies the practice.

Host: then there is the Daniels law complication.

We have already seen some challenges to public info request from that perspective.

Can you explain that aspect of the bill?

>> Daniels law had a good intention, to protect judges.

It was implemented after judged Thomas' trial was killed.

They expanded the category so drastically that the home address of everyone that had ever been an officer are exempt.

Agencies have a hard time producing records.

It really slows down access.

And on top of that, in the last month, you I've had hundreds of lawsuits filed by police officers trying to seek a 1000 other penalty because there address was released to a property website.

It has become a cottage industry for police officers and not serving the original purpose.

It slows down access to everyone and this bill does nothing to fix that problem.

It also allows the more time to fill out the request.

Host: I think the vast majority of the public that has never filed a request and a great majority of journalists that have never had to file this request why should the public be concerned about this?

>> this bill enables a lot of secrecy.

It makes it harder to know what your government is doing.

A lot of people actually do want to file this kind of request because they want to know what is happening in their town or they need records associated with their home.

There are so many new obstacles in this bill to filing them.

And one key part that the bill does is undermine the -- permission.

Right now, if the agency denies access to a record, the law currently allows you to sue and hire an attorney like me who will represent you for free and if we win, the agency has to pay the legal fees.

That allows the average person and the media the ability to afford their rights.

Host: you don't know what you've got until it is gone.

Did I hear right that lawmakers are exempt?

>> yes.

The legislature itself is not completely exempt.

You can get some of their financial records.

But otherwise, any communication they have with anyone whether it is a resident or a lobbyist, any document they have drafted, drafts of bills, it is all confidential.

Both sides of this issue are unhappy with this.

Host: technically speaking, this is a reform bill.

Something in it has got to be useful.

What is good in here?

>> I cannot find anything positive.

Advocates that are pro-government and pro-transparency have a list of things we would like and there is nothing of that sort in this bill.

We want transparency, internal affairs records to be public, and that is not in this bill.

We would like the legislature to be subject to this and it is not in the bill.

There is nothing here that makes access easier or broader.

it was enacted 20 years ago and never once has the legislature is said let's amend it in favor of transparency.

It has been a slow chipping away at the access we had.

Host: keeping an eye on FastTrack Bills, CJ Griffin, thank you for coming on with us.

>> thank you and have a great day.

Host: panel, welcome to you all.

You thought getting this kind of request filed was hard now, wait until the legislature gets a hold of it.

What does it mean for reporters trying to do the people's work?

>> I think this is going to be a real impediment if not a real chokehold on access.

It is really a disgrace and it is a disgrace as well that they are rushing it.

There is no need to rush it.

I ran into Senator Andrew Zwicker at the Somerset convention and he said his phone was ringing off the hook.

He is -- he agrees with some of the concerns driving the bill but he says it is voluminous, complicated and we need to do this right.

But slamming it into committee on Monday leads to the sense that they are rushing this through and they will bite the bullet and listen to the complaints and move on without really really taking the time to heed the concerns and they are legitimate concerns.

And it will only further degrade the power of the Shrinking press in this state.

Host: wow, all right.

Dan, who is behind this?

What is the rush?

Have we heard from other lawmakers?

>> the top sponsors are Senator Paul Sato -- they have supported an overhaul in the past.

The overall context is legislative minutia on both sides.

They have been pushing for this for sometime.

I remember even as early back as the winter of 2022, the speaker said it was time to get an overhaul.

The Senate Minority Leader agreed.

I don't think this is an issue that falls on party lines.

I think an overhaul will generally have bipartisan support.

It does seem like lawmakers have been looking to overhaul this.

>> overhaul?

>> I was going dad coming in political groups -- they have been trying to amend public record laws in ways because they think they are to onerous.

Host: 100 years ago I could go to the precinct, ask the Sergeant for the blotter and look at the crimes for the week before my police beat briefs.

It is hard to imagine that kind of transparency today even before this OPRA overhaul.

>> the bloggers don't exist anymore but as Dan mentioned, anyone that follows government for sometime knows there are issues [indiscernible] Unfortunately, the government likes to keep things secret.

They can say it is too difficult but in most cases that is a lot of nonsense.

The government could say, we know something and you, the general public, know that we like it that way.

It makes it -- it makes us feel important.

Normally Republicans just uphold whatever Democrats want to do.

But I don't think it is going to happen in this case.

And the general public may not care but it is an issue that has to be talked about.

Host: Charlie, it looks like the fix is in on this?

I would put money down that the fix is in but I want to say three things.

It is not an overhaul but a gutting.

The Republicans are more than happy to let the Democrats do the dirty work and at the same time complain about it.

And the third thing that I think is really important in the broader scheme of things, we are at a time of, with the nation from the White House on down, that is frazzled about the state of democracy.

And, to me, this transparency -- this dims our ability to scrutinize our government.

It is antidemocratic in the grand scheme so it is really a disgrace.

Host: if you are afraid of the state of democracy the answer is not less democracy but more democracy.

>> or less transparency, absolutely.

Host: I want to get to the president's speech and a moment but let's look at some state politics first.

I cannot remember this much enthusiasm for accounting party conventions ever, really.

How about you?

Charles: I don't.

We have not had those kind of competitive fight on this scale before.

Maybe during the 2001st decade, there were some really good fights.

Some internal fights worth covering.

But generally speaking, a lot of the primaries have been sort of yawning affairs.

And I think also this comes back to the nature of this race and the nature of the candidates.

We have never had a governor's wife -- and all the question that raises.

And we have the backdrop of the Bob Menendez indictment and his greater career in the broader concern about democracy as I mentioned earlier.

So all of that leads us to a lot of bouncing around the state and running into Daniel everywhere.

Host: Dan, you have two cam he Murphy wins in a row by sizable margins.

-- Tammy Murphy wins in a row by sizable margins.

Dan: she picked up county party endorsements in Berkeley County and Somerset County.

Both of which were voted on by rank-and-file Democrats.

In Berkeley it was done by secret ballot and in Somerset it was done by a show of cards.

The unit -- the important context in both contests was that she came in as a favorite in large part because she was endorsed by the County chairs.

That being said, a win is a win and those counties combined represent around 14% of the Democratic electorate.

It shows the party line which places the parties hand on the ballot.

Host: Fred, we saw the camp look a little on their heels by the end of the week.

A lot of talk about the system being unfair.

Fred: indeed.

Eddie Kim talked about that last night in Somerset.

He filed a federal suit.

It is also interesting to know that there was a poll that found out that Tammy Murphy has a higher name recognition then Andy Kim but Andy Kim has a higher favorable rating.

Host: what is the impact of the new campaign manager, Maggie Moran?

she is a formidable individual.

Charles: she has -- she knows the state and the politics.

I guess that will be a benefit.

Someone that has that kind of experience in camp cannot hurt.

Host: a campaign manager never really won you a raise but they can certainly lose you a race.

She looks like the kind of person that they needed to bring in to maybe bring some stability there?

Charles: absolutely.

The other campaign manager left and created this up archer, as they put it.

And I feel like that created the sense that they were really wobbling off-track.

It came at a time not long after the first lady lost their home turf and after Burlington, it looked like that campaign had completely gone off its track.

To bring in a seasoned veteran hand of New Jersey makes hand -- make sense.

Host: you mentioned another really bad work -- bad week for Bob Menendez.

A codefendant pleads and then flips.

New charges of obstruction.

Democrats have to be thinking, who will rid us of this man?

Charles: [LAUGHTER] I think the evidence is starting to grow that he probably won't run as -- or seek reelection as a Democrat.

There is a question whether he might file as an independent.

But, frankly, the Senate is really the one with the lever that could expel him at this point.

And there seems to be no inclination other than Senator John Fetterman in Pennsylvania to dislodge him from the Senate.

So, the likely scenario is that he will finish out his term which ends next January.

Host: Dan, you have been immersed in the Senate race.

How much of the conversation is Bob Menendez, anymore?

Dan: people have not mentioned the senator by name a lot although I would say that Congressman Andy Kim has generally talked about the government throughout his campaign.

He says the reason he decided to run for the U.S. Senate was the day after Senator Melendez said something along the lines on social media saying -- I am not resigning and I'm not going anywhere.

Congressman Kim said that was the reason he decided to run for U.S. Senate.

He often says he wants to restore integrity to the 10 -- to the Senate.

It is the extent that we have heard about that in this race.

Going on to whether he will run or not, the final deadline to run as a Democrat is March 25.

Quite soon.

Senator Menendez needs to get together 1000 petition signatures in order to get on the ballot.

You have not seen him take action to get nominated petitions.

I believe he was even asked yesterday if he would run for reelection by reporters.

And he gave a noncommittal answer saying, we will see.

Host: time for our only in New Jersey moments.

Quintessentially Jersey moments.

Dan: in Essex County, and I scream Parler -- the final episode.

It sold a booth on eBay for a considerable amount of money.

Tony soprano sat there.

Host: I think it would be interesting if you polled the people to see who actually thought that Tony soprano was actually a person.

Charlie, do you have one?

Charles: last night at the Somerset Democratic convention, each candidate was given two minutes to speak and usually, you know, the speeches are interrupted with the ringing of a bell or someone coming out saying, your time is up but last night they used a DJ to interrupt with some really cheesy, throwback music and it startled everyone.

Suddenly the convention looked like an old disco.

Host: [LAUGHTER] I love the cards.

People were holding up green cards.

Charles: green cards to express their support.

And as you mentioned earlier, we are learning for the first time how these conventions really operate and it is like, like going back to the 1840's in some respects.

Not all of them but certainly that one.

Host: the gentleman from Main Street will be heard.

Charles: I was missing my bowler cap.

Host: mine comes from Bergen County.

They tell us 10 never take a meal from someone you are covering, a conflict of interest , buying influence.

Once in a while, when you're stuck in a union hall watching democracy move at its leisurely pace, you can get a little hungry.

And so it was that Adam Silverstein of the Bergen County Democratic committee, seeing a famished press corps unprepared for the rigors of a county convention took pity on us with a few boxes of locally sourced pizza.

It took us a minute but after a quick ethics assessment it was determined that it takes more than a sliced to buy off the likes of Stile, Hahn, so almost all of us grabbed a sliced or for the record we offered to pay but as any good reporter knows, sometimes you have to let a mensch be a mensch.

The pizza was determined to be so-so by the critics of the press, we are who we are.

A tip of the hat to Adam Silverstein for making it happen.

That is "Reporters Roundtable."

Thank you very much and to CJ Griffin for joining us.

You can follow their show on X on roundtable and find more content and full episodes when you scan the QR code on your screen.

Thank you for watching.

And we will see you next week.

>> major funding for Reporters Roundtable was provided by RWJ Barnabas health.

Let's be healthy together.

Rowan university, educating New Jersey students and partnering with New Jersey businesses and transforming New Jersey's future.

New Jersey business magazine.

A magazine for New Jersey businesses.

And by politicos New Jersey playbook, a newsletter online at Politico.com.

♪ ♪