Ohio Puts Police Bodycam Footage Behind a Paywall

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed into law on Thursday changes to the state’s public records statute that allow law enforcement agencies to charge hundreds of dollars for body camera footage. Though such videos are central to watchdog reporting and police oversight, Ohio opted to join a handful of states that have made it easier for cops to put a steep price tag on transparency.

“Public bodies should be in the business of making it easier — not harder — for the public and the press to access important government records like body worn camera footage,” said Gunita Singh, an attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “There’s no need to impose vast sums of money onto requesters doing their part to foster transparency and accountability.”

Most Read

Progressive Group Founded by Bernie Sanders Endorses Billionaire for California Governor

Akela Lacy

Israel’s “Black Wednesday” Massacre Leaves Lebanese Families Giving DNA to ID Loved Ones’ Remains

Alaa Serhal

These Middle Eastern News Sites Are Actually U.S. Government Propaganda Operations

Sam Biddle

Over the past decade, more law enforcement agencies have deployed body cameras — and the footage they provide has become central to covering cops and stemming police brutality. At the same time, law enforcement agencies and police unions have begun complaining about the time and expense of turning these videos over to the public when requested. Some states have responded by authorizing fees for processing footage: In 2023, Arizona passed a law allowing charges up to $46 “per video-hour reviewed.” In 2016, Indiana authorized fees as high as $150 per video.

Ohio’s enacted law, House Bill 315, which was quietly introduced in the state legislature in late December, creates a new provision for requesting law enforcement videos. State and local law enforcement agencies can now charge steep fees for reviewing and redacting videos — up to $75 per hour of footage produced and a maximum of $750 per video. Police can require that the fees be paid in advance.

Press advocates and civil liberties groups urged DeWine to veto the hastily approved measure. He declined.

In a signing statement, DeWine said House Bill 315 was “a workable compromise to balance the modern realities of preparing these public records and the cost it takes to prepare them.”

Gary Daniels, chief lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, was alarmed that the bill was passed and signed with “zero legislative debate.”

“Ohioans deserve government transparency, especially regarding policing. Instead, crucial records will now be sequestered behind a paywall few can afford,” Daniels said. “Advocates, news media, and victims of police actions are right to be concerned how these unnecessary changes will impact their safety and insight into how police operate in and around the state.”

“We are disappointed that this law was enacted last minute, without an opportunity to be heard on our concerns,” said Monica Nieporte, president and executive director of the Ohio News Media Association. “We feel this law has many deficiencies and will lead to unnecessary barriers to records access both for journalists and the public.”

Nieporte said her group was “committed to working with the legislature, Governor DeWine and Attorney General [Dave] Yost to amend this language immediately.”