Some Wyoming lawmakers in a working group are considering reforming the state’s records requests law and public access laws. It would affect how Wyomingites access public records or view public meetings from any government entity.
Legislators have drafted a bill that would require records to be released within ten days of a request, adjusting fees for record requests and adjusting rules around public comment periods.
The working group was created by the Joint Corporations, Elections & Political Subdivisions Committee. The topic was a priority of the Committee for the interim, which outlined the issue as follows: “Complaints have arisen in a few areas, including the effectiveness of the ombudsman program, the cost imposed by government entities on records requests, and ignorance and disregard of public records and public meetings statutes by public officials.”
The corporations committee has already met three times during this interim. They’ve reviewed two memos prepared by the Legislative Service Office (LSO) that explored how other states, like Utah, Idaho, and Colorado handle their records request and public access matters, such as rules surrounding public comment periods or making state legislature committee meetings publicly available. Darlena Potter, the State Public Records Ombudsman, told the committee there was a lot to consider.
“I just want to bring the bigger awareness that there are other issues that really impact [the citizens] as well. I think that we need to take a look at the whole process,” said Potter.
Those other issues included making sure county clerk offices have clear and transparent policies around the records request office and that some counties and towns are still using physical records as opposed to digital.
Legislators eventually opted to create a working group, sometimes called a task force, to look into the topic, take public comment and eventually make recommendations to expand on the draft bill.
The working group met for the first time at the Capitol building in Cheyenne on the morning of Sept. 29. Darlena Potter, now as chairwoman, led the working group.
Potter began the meeting by saying she wanted to mostly hear from public commenters, and that the three main issues she believed people wanted to see addressed were pricing fees for local entities, a timeline of responses, and how to handle entities outside the state of Wyoming requesting massive amounts of data.
Senator Cale Case (R-Lander), a legislator on the working group, said he too was not looking to “drive this boat” but instead looking forward to working on the draft bill after hearing public comment.
“I believe you’ve scheduled two of these meetings, so hopefully we can have some frank discussion today and move forward,” said Case. “I’m not opposed to broadening it [from] these three issues. I think our records laws cause a lot of [anxiety] for lots of people in different ways.”
Twelve members of the public testified to the working group with a range of opinions and suggestions.
Victor Miller, a Cheyenne resident who once ran an AI for mayor of Cheyenne, shared his frustration with the records request process and cited a case from 2024 where members of the Wyoming Department of Education were found to have concealed information during a public records request process.
“We’ve had the anatomy of a public records request examined and on full display with the Powers case. We know what happens behind the scenes now, because we got to look behind the curtain. What happens is you don’t get your record, you get sent home and you get ignored,” said Miller.
Bob Bonnar held a different tone. The Editor-in-Chief of the News Letter Journal felt more confident in at least one public official's ability to handle public records issues. Bonnar complimented Potter as a competent ombudsman who could be trusted to push back on data-mining companies. In a previous corporation committee meeting, some county clerks spoke about the disruptive nature of trying to compile requested records for these companies. Bonnar wanted to remind clerks that they do have tools for dealing with data miners.
“These out-of-state data mining companies that I’ve heard so many examples about, you can tell them: Our office is open from 9 to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and you are free to come inspect these records. There is no current requirement in law that records be sent, delivered, printed, copies made, or anything else; there is a right of inspection in the law,” said Bonnar.
For smaller counties, the idea of preparing massive records requests for these data mining companies feels like a drain on their resources. Some county clerks mentioned they receive similar large requests from state residents, and while they’re fine responding to residents' requests, not all clerks' offices are equipped for it. Larger administrations might have more man-power to carry out such a request.
Some clerks felt the ten-day turnaround suggestion wasn’t feasible, even for a city like Casper, according to city clerk Fleur Tremel.
“A single request [for Casper] can involve multiple departments, for example, legal, planning, police, HR, fire, and they each have their own files and databases and custodians that we have to work with to get those files ...Do we prioritize complete and thorough over quick?” asked Tremel.
The mayor of Mills said with a population of less than 5,000, a quicker turnaround for her small staff could create less accurate results. Especially for law-enforcement-related requests, which Mayor Leah Juarez claimed were their most frequently requested records.
“The biggest records requested right now are for the police department,” said Juarez. ”They usually involve lawsuits or individuals who want access, fairly, to their arrest or cases. The problem with that is if they're still under investigation or information needs to be redacted, that's a pretty detailed system that has to go forth.”
One solution that was floated to address these issues is a mass-centralized database of public records. The assumption is that it would create a more organized environment and provide ease of access to those requesting records.
“That's not exactly the way it would play out,” said Drew Dilly, the Chief Data Officer of the Wyoming Enterprise Technology Services. “There's a lot of data that could be put in, but it's a lot of data. That doesn't mean that it's de-identified, doesn't mean that it's anonymous, that doesn't mean it's ready for public consumption of what a public record would be.”
Dilly instead suggested that entities focus on being data-ready, or making their current records digitally sufficient for release.
No legislation was adopted or changed; however, legislators on the public working group said they’ll review public comments and return to discuss proposals during their second meeting scheduled for Oct. 20, with hopes of submitting draft legislation to the corporations committee in November.
This reporting was made possible by a grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, supporting state government coverage in the state. Wyoming Public Media and Jackson Hole Community Radio are partnering to cover state issues both on air and online.
