As this outlet reported, the scantly-debated law was meant to help departments dissuade, or at least recoup the labor costs associated with, content creators that lodge mass public records requests and post those videos online in search of commercial profit.
But the law has sparked concern among First Amendment advocates who note the law could put video public records out of reach for journalists or everyday citizens.
Here are some of the responses this outlet has received from Miami Valley law enforcement agencies.
Dayton Police
“The Dayton Police Department is reviewing the legislation that allows agencies to charge for body and in-car camera video requests,” Police Information Specialist James Rider told this outlet.
Rider said Dayton PD has seen a “sharp increase” in video records requests, “often from individuals operating social media channels.” In 2023, the department processed 1,300 such requests; in 2024 it processed over 3,000.
Rider noted that the process for actually turning these videos — Ohio law requires them to protect the identity of crime victims and uncharged suspects — is “labor-intensive and costly.”
Montgomery County Sheriff
Agency spokeswoman Christine Bevins told this outlet that the Montgomery County Sheriff’s office has no immediate plans to divert from its policy — which most departments have today — of charging requestors only for the material the videos are provided on.
“At this point we are waiting to see if the law itself reduces the number of requests we get from those whose only interest in the videos is to post the material online for monetary gain,” Bevins said. She noted that the department isn’t fully confident the law will stay as-is.
The video requests have been so abundant, Bevins said, that the county hired a full-time employee for the department’s redaction unit to help with the approximately 20 requests the unit fields each day.
“We get lots of requests that we either know or suspect are destined to be used online for commercial purposes. It’s not unusual to get a list of a dozen of more incidents from a single requestor and it’s not uncommon for a single incident to have multiple deputies and vehicles involved,” Bevins said.
“Some would suggest that we should start charging those with a commercial interest and not charge citizens with a demonstrated need for the videos. At times, it could be difficult to differentiate the two and I imagine that those with commercial interests would just change the way they make their requests in an attempt to avoid the fees.”
Springfield, Clark County Sheriff
On Thursday, the newly-minted Clark County Sheriff Chris Clark told this outlet that there are no immediate plans to change policy.
“We have not changed our pricing on that, as of yet,” Clark said. “We’re looking at, but it’s not something that I’m real hot-to-trot on changing just yet.”
Clark said he expects the mere existence of the law to cut down on frivolous requests.
“I’m not saying it won’t change in the near future. It’s on my agenda, it’s just on the back burner for right now,” he said.
Springfield is among many cities that have not adopted a policy under the new law, maintaining the status quo — allowing departments to charge for materials such as flash drives or disks, but not labor — for the time being.
Kettering, Hamilton, others holding off
This news outlet reached out to law enforcement agencies across this nine-county region of southwest Ohio. Most said they have no immediate plans to start charging for police videos, but could do so if the burden of fulfilling requests becomes or stays too high.
In an email, Kettering Police Department’s Public Information Officer Cynthia James told this outlet that city “has not adopted a policy yet,” but they are still reviewing the state legislation.
The same is true in Hamilton, where Assistant Chief of Police Brian Robinson told this outlet, “We have no policies in place or in development at this time.”
In the Butler County’s Sheriffs Office, Chief Deputy Anthony Dwyer told this outlet that he expects more video requests to come in as more people become aware of the department’s adoption of body cameras. “We have discussed charging for videos but we have not finalized that decision,” Dwyer said.
This news outlet received similar responses from the Ohio State Highway Patrol, Fairfield Twp., Middletown, Monroe, Troy, Piqua and others.
Miami County targets commercial requests
Miami County Sheriff Dave Duchak told this outlet that his department’s policies will only impact “those who operate commercialized businesses and exploit the open records law for profit.”
Duchak said the rate will include the hourly wage of support staff and their benefits. He hopes it will “dissuade the abuse of Ohio’s open record laws.”
“(Commercial requests) are a burden to the system and do not align with the purpose of public records, which is transparency,” Duchak said. “This is an issue that should have been dealt with by the legislature a long time ago.”
Some cities charging everyone
Not all departments have been tentative. Oakwood Law Director Robert Jacques, for example, told this outlet the department would begin charging journalists, citizens and content creators alike for police video records.
“The city has not finalized the hourly rate that will be charged to cover administrative expenses when (the law) goes into effect in April,” Jacques said. “We anticipate that fees will be based on the wage and fringe benefit costs for a records clerk, converted to an hourly rate, plus any actual reimbursables such as flash drives or other storage media.”
Jacques said Oakwood typically receives fewer than 10 video records requests a year.
In Tipp City, it’s been determined that they’ll charge the same way no matter the requestor.
“Our policy will reflect the (law) changes and charge $75 an hour up to $750 for preparing the video,” Tipp City Police Chief Greg Adkins told this outlet. “This charge covers the employee’s time, benefits, and material costs.”
Adkins said the department will not charge if “an involved party” wants to sit down and review video records. Otherwise, he said, “We will not direct a policy that allows the release to specific organizations at no cost and to other organizations at full price. We will be fair across all spectrums of requests.”
For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It’s free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening.
Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
About the Author
