The 3,970 appeals filed last year are a 23% increase from the previous record in 2024. Nearly two-thirds came from citizens, while companies and private organizations, the next largest segment, accounted for 17%.<\/p>\n
Sen. Cris Dush (R-Jefferson) at a press conference on Shapiro\u2019s budget proposal on Feb. 3, 2025. (Photo by Ian Karbal\/Capital-Star)<\/p>\n But the law still needs tweaking, as state Sen. Cris Dush (R-Jefferson) recently told the Capital-Star. Dush regularly introduces his chamber\u2019s annual \u201cSunshine Week\u201d resolution<\/a>, which recognizes public access laws in mid-March.\u00a0<\/p>\n In the \u201cbad old days,\u201d Dush said, \u201ceven the budget here in Pennsylvania was done behind closed doors.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s still a certain amount of that,\u201d he added. \u201cBut when it comes to the actual floor debates and the discussions where everybody is involved \u2026 it\u2019s critical that everybody gets to know them and there aren\u2019t secret deals being done.\u201d<\/p>\n Dush likened Pennsylvanians to \u201cfranchise owners of government,\u201d saying that \u201cfranchise owners have every right to know the things that are going on.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cPeople need to know that the Right-to-Know law is in place and that it is a tool that when they feel frustrated about not seeing things that they think should be out there, in public, they should be using it,\u201d said Dush. \u201cWe need more franchise owners involved in oversight and watching what\u2019s going on.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Liz Wagenseller, the executive director of the Office of Open Records, noted differences in Pennsylvania\u2019s public access law that made it \u201cfriendlier\u201d for requesters, namely the tight response deadline. In the commonwealth, agencies have five days to respond, but can request a 30-day extension.\u00a0<\/p>\n If that request is denied, the requester can appeal to Wagenseller\u2019s agency \u2014 where the government body must defend the denial \u2014 and will get a response within 30 days.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThat is lightning fast compared to a lot of other states,\u201d said Wagenseller. \u201cIf you\u2019re concerned about something, you can peek behind the curtain and see what it is that\u2019s going on \u2026 knowing that the public is watching and can get records, I think agencies may carefully consider their decisions. And I think that is good for everyone.\u201d<\/p>\n Changes to Right-to-Know<\/p>\n Over a dozen bills seek to change the law. A handful add quasi-public entities to the law \u2014 like the Pennsylvania School Boards Association<\/a> or Homeowners Associations<\/a> \u2014 while others expand exceptions for \u201cburdensome<\/a>\u201d requests, fragile historical documents<\/a> or legislator<\/a> addresses<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n The most recent movement was on House Bill 802<\/a>, authored by Rep. Liz Hanbidge (D-Montgomery) to exempt certain disability accommodations \u2014 like transcripts generated for a deaf mayor \u2014 from disclosure. That measure moved out of committee in December and could go before the House chamber as early as next week.<\/p>\n SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX<\/a><\/p>\n Senate Bill 686<\/a>, introduced by Dush, advanced through his chamber on a 31-18 vote in June, but hasn\u2019t moved out of committee in the House. That proposal would make it a third-degree felony to intentionally destroy or alter documents subject to Right-to-Know.<\/p>\n His other proposal, Senate Bill 790<\/a>, which addresses \u201cvexatious\u201d requesters, moved out of a Senate committee in June. Dush described the targeted individuals as someone who had \u201cweaponized\u201d the Right-to-Know process and used their requests to overwhelm a municipality or to act on a personal grudge.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cTheir intent is to drive the local government official crazy,\u201d said Dush.<\/p>\n The bill\u2019s memo<\/a> notes its support from associations for schools, township supervisors, township commissioners, boroughs and county commissioners. Those bodies can apply for a one-year relief period with OOR from a \u201cvexatious\u201d requester, which Dush called a \u201ccooling off period.\u201d<\/p>\n Wagenseller said the details and exact definition would matter in such a proposal, but noted that public records officers in other states have reported \u201cextreme\u201d harassment. In Connecticut, which has its own vexatious requester law, a man had to be escorted away from the office<\/a> by police after an assistant hit a silent alarm.<\/p>\n \u201cIf it is used as something where it\u2019s someone that\u2019s just annoying because they have a lot of requests, that (definition) I would have concerns about,\u201d said Wagenseller.\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"Sen.](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-pa\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/2c4002a6a3bf243eefef755b46793734.jpeg\"\/)
<\/a><\/p>\n