Hochul's veto of police radio bill doesn't serve the public

Gov. Kathy Hochul's Dec. 19 veto of a bill that would have granted journalists across the state real-time access to encrypted police radio transmissions will have negative consequences for not only the media, but the public as well.

The veto allows police departments to continue to use technology to bar the press from listening to their radio dispatches, a vital source of news tips that had been unimpeded for 90 years.

In her veto message, Hochul said that "local emergency services agencies utilize different technologies that could significantly impact the ability of local government to implement the law in a way that would not jeopardize public safety." She added that "in a time when public officials face growing threats of extreme violence, the bill also requires a police agency to effectively make real-time disclosure of the official’s movements to bloggers and paparazzi in addition to more traditional journalists." And she concluded that "the bill requires police agencies to invest tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure within 90 days without budgeting for it. While transparency is laudable, it should not come at the expense of public safety."

While the governor claimed the "sensitive information" exemption was too narrow and would give the press access to undercover officer communications, the bill explicitly barred disclosures of confidential information relating to criminal investigations or the identity of confidential sources. And it would not have required police agencies to disclose the whereabouts of public officials.

Hochul could have worked with the sponsors to overcome her objections, as she did in signing a bill last month to stop the taking of horseshoe crabs for bait and medical purposes, rather than vetoing it, as she did in 2024.

The governor also failed to see that cutting off public access to the transmissions creates a public safety problem. Journalists are not adversaries of public safety. In many cases, they are its allies, helping to get accurate information to people who need it. Whether it’s a car crash that shuts down the Southern State Parkway or a threat that necessitates a school lockdown, the public has a right to know — and know quickly.

While the Nassau and Suffolk police departments have switched to encrypted communication, not all local governments support that blackout. Departments around the country, such as Palo Alto, California, that had encrypted communications have reversed course. Hochul's veto came a day after the New York City Council voted to reopen the NYPD's blacked-out airways for credentialed media.

Supporters of encrypted police communication argue that it protects sensitive information and personal privacy. But the legislation addressed that. Under the bill, access would have been password-protected, monitored and limited to credentialed journalists. Reporters would not be able to transmit on the channels or interfere in any way. If anyone abused the privilege, access would be revoked. And police agencies would retain the right to encrypt sensitive communications.

With Hochul’s veto, it's the public as well as journalists who will suffer.

This guest essay reflects the views of Jeffrey Bessen, managing editor of Herald Community Media, and the Press Club of Long Island board, of which he is a member.