Governor Christie’s frequent travel around the country often makes news. It also may produce pivotal, much-needed case law on OPRA’s exemption for security-related records.

In examining the costs of the Governor’s trips, the press has reported that the State Police’s Executive Protection Bureau (EPB), which provides security to governors and other officials, had close to $1 million in travel expenses since Governor Christie first took office. Although the total amount of EPB expenses has been made public, a reporter filed a lawsuit over the denial by the Governor’s Office of his OPRA request for the credit card statements which would show the specific charges made by EPB officers during the Governor’s trips. Judge Mary C. Jacobson, Assignment Judge, Mercer County, is scheduled to hear oral argument in the case on May 28.

The Governor’s Office denied the request on the basis of OPRA’s “security risk exemptions.” As explained in the brief recently filed by the Attorney General’s Office, the records must be kept confidential because they contain “date-by-date” and “transaction-by-transaction” details, information that would reveal the identities of EPB officers and the number of officers providing security. The Attorney General argues that the credit card statements also would provide potential wrongdoers with “deep insight into the EPB’s security procedures.” The brief says that such exposure of EPB security measures would compromise the security of the Governor, other high-ranking officials, and innocent bystanders.

As may be seen, this case has important ramifications beyond interest in Governor Christie’s travels, because it involves the ability of the State Police to protect all future governors. If the detailed expense statements do enable the viewer to figure out EPB security procedures, the risk to anyone protected by the EPB is clear. The court must determine whether disclosure of the information in fact would potentially interfere with the EPB’s protective measures.

This is not a new issue under OPRA; as the Attorney General’s brief notes, litigants have sought access to similar EPB travel records in several other cases. The issue keeps coming up because there is always public interest in the activities of the Governor’s Office and the State Police. Despite this, no New Jersey court has rendered a precedential opinion on whether OPRA requires disclosure of EPB expense records.

It is time for the trial court in this case–or if there is an appeal, a higher court–to issue an opinion that resolves the question of whether these records are covered by OPRA’s security exemption.