While they weren’t sworn to secrecy, very few of the dozen or so advocates who attended a meeting with Gov. Phil Murphy to discuss their objections to the OPRA reform bill would speak on the record about the State House session. But Jesse Burns of the League of Women voters, who was there, said it was a useful meeting for advocates to remind the governor about what’s at stake.
“The governor was very clear that he was there to listen, so we didn’t receive much feedback. But I do think that our concerns were heard and we had the opportunity to express them,” she said. “The things that Governor Murphy has been able to achieve in a pro-democracy agenda for the state and how this decision that’s now in front of him can really stain that legacy of pro-democracy work. This could really take our state backwards.”
Other advocates at the hour-long session said the governor seemed to know the issue well and noted the advocates’ objections to items like fee shifting, the exclusion of meta data and rules that discourage multiple requests. Pressure for the governor to veto the bill has been mounting. Mayors of the state’s two largest cities have taken to social media to urge the governor to kill it.
“We do not have to get rid of OPRA. We do not have to gut OPRA,” said Newark Mayor Ras Baraka in a social media post. “In fact, OPRA is a testament to our transparency and the desire for us to have democracy and our unity around what’s right and what’s just.”
“Legacy” is a word you start to hear more often as the governor heads into the home stretch of his tenure. Former Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg has been a frequent critic of the OPRA reform bill and the process undertaken to pass it. Like many progressives, she says democracy itself is on the ballot in the fall and the governor’s signature would send a terrible message
“This is not only a legacy issue for the governor, and I hope his legacy remains intact because he has done many good things and I hope continues to do many great things over the next two years,” said Weinberg, a Democrat who retired from the Legislature. “But it’s not only his legacy, it’s about our democracy and I can’t overstate enough how important transparency and accountability is to democracy is on the ballot.”
Saladin Ambar, the senior scholar at Eagleton Center on the American Governor, says there’s a lot riding on this governor’s reaction to a bill that has drawn such negative response from the public and transparency advocates.
“This is not a bill that I think is going to do anything but leave a bit of a bad taste in the mouths of people thinking back on your legacy,” he added. “If I were advising the governor, and I don’t advise the governor, but if I did, I would suggest he veto this bill.”
Murphy said Friday that he had no news to make on the bill.
“We had a lot of incomings and we had a very constructive meeting with a lot of advocates the other day. I give them a lot of credit for making their case,” he said. “We heard from a lot of mayors, but no news to make today.”
It’s unclear what the governor will actually do here, although an unofficial poll of those at the meeting reflects a belief that, given the transactional nature of Trenton, and with so many other issues tied into the bill and the state budget, Murphy is likely poised to hold his nose and sign it.
