A bill in Florida's Legislature would shield personal information like home addresses and phone numbers for elected officials. Lawmakers cite potential threats, but government watchdogs say it may lead to reduced accountability and unnecessarily infringes on the public's right to records.
The bill would allow government agencies to redact home addresses, phone numbers and birth dates from state and local elected figures, such as members of Florida's Cabinet, the governor, city and county commissioners, school board members and more.
Passed with bipartisan support in the Senate, it extends the same protections to the spouses and children of elected officials as well as exempting school and day care facility information. The House is expected to vote on its version of the proposal soon after lawmakers voted for it unanimously in two committees.
The sponsor of the House bill, Rep. Susan Valdés, R-Tampa, suggested in committee that her decision to sponsor the bill was personal. After switching to the Republican party on December 9, Hillsborough County sheriff's deputies drove by the former Democrat's home nearly every hour for six days, according to call print records. The last directed patrol took place on Christmas.
The bill would restrict access to such information in public records in Florida but would not affect law enforcement databases that are already generally off-limits to anyone other than authorities.
"My family, my children were put in harm's way," she said before a vote. "No public servant should have to go through that for serving their community," Valdés said.
Organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida and First Amendment Foundation are concerned the bill may make it harder to hold elected officials accountable. The change would make it harder to identify lawmakers who don't live in their legislative districts – as they are required by law – and more difficult to determine whether elected officials enjoy special treatment, such as a property purchase below its market value or neighborhood improvements or zoning restrictions.
Shevrin Jones, D-Miami Gardens, said during a committee hearing the goal of the bill is to keep elected officials safe and ensure qualified candidates aren't discouraged from running for office.
"This has nothing to do with trying to weaken government transparency," he said. "That's a bunch of crap."
Without knowing legislators' full primary addresses, it may become much harder to check if a candidate lives in the area they represent, said Abdelilah Skhir, a senior strategist with the ACLU of Florida. Some experts said housing concerns are especially top of mind after the Department of Management Services paid thousands for the travel of out-of-state employees to Tallahassee, according to the Florida Trident.
"Do you wanna vote for someone who doesn't call the district they're running in home?" said Bobby Block, executive director of the First Amendment Foundation, a nonprofit in Tallahassee that advocates for open government, and public information.
The bill would require that elected officials' zip codes and the city where each lives must remain public, but experts said they were concerned that isn't enough to ensure politicians will live where they are required. Some electoral districts are so large they split zip codes, they said.
Jones said he would support an amendment to ensure politicians still live in their districts, but an amendment was not added before the bill passed Florida's Senate on April 9 with two no votes.
Restricting publicly accessible information limits how well the press can analyze the actions of elected officials, said Barbara Petersen, the co-founder and CEO of the Florida Center for Government Accountability. It may be harder for journalists to get in contact with elected officials if their phone numbers are redacted.
The Florida Constitution allows broad access to public records. Agencies can charge residents for time-consuming or difficult records requests. The additional redactions allowed under the bill would likely make fulfilling requests take longer and cost more, Petersen said.
Skhir of the Florida ACLU said, "A free press that is quickly and efficiently able to get public records requests fulfilled is essential to democracy."
In 2002, a law was passed allowing harsher penalties for crimes committed using information from public records. That led some experts to question the need for a new regulation.
Petersen said those intent on harming politicians won't wait to file a public records request to get their home address. She said they would either search the internet or they would follow politicians home. The idea that another regulation would stop those from causing harm, she said, is a fallacy which only restricts government accountability.
In a committee hearing, Block said the legislation wasn't justified. No statistics were included explaining how severe the safety problem has become for elected officials, he said. Only a hypothetical potential for abuse was cited as the reason for the bill, he said.
In response, four senators shared stories of how threats of violence have complicated their lives.
"These are not hypothetical, sir," said Jason Pizzo, D-Hollywood, after sharing two instances where he and his family's safety had been threatened. "We get a lot of threats that we don't announce to the public."
In a phone interview, Block said "Regardless of whether there are threats out there – that's another argument – the legislation as it stands does not meet the requirements of the law."
When legislators want to exempt new categories of records, he said, they must demonstrate an overwhelming public necessity – preferably using statistics – which trumps the public's constitutional right to access. While political violence may be increasing, he said the current statement of public interest is insufficient, and the bill is eligible to be challenged in courts if it passes.
Petersen, who monitored open government legislation for 25 years as the former president of First Amendment Foundation, said there used to be bipartisan scrutiny over public record exemptions. Now they fly through the Legislature in overwhelming majorities. The lack of robust justification for this exemption is the latest in a trend by Florida legislators who no longer take exemptions seriously, she said.
If passed by the House and approved by the governor, the exemptions will remain active until October 2030 unless renewed by the Legislature.
Petersen said she thought the bill would likely pass the House given a lack of opposition. Gov. Ron DeSantis signed three similar bills last year exempting the personal information of city and county attorneys, some circuit court employees and commissioners on the Florida Gaming Control Commission.
Block said he believes the Legislature's actions are made by fear without considering how they step on their constituents' rights. Strong public records laws are necessary for a thriving democracy, he said. Any time that right may be changed, there should be a very serious reason, he said.
"The right to know is being whittled away," he said.
This story was produced by Fresh Take Florida, a news service of the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications. The reporter can be reached at mcupelli@ufl.edu.
Copyright 2025 WUFT 89.1
