Senate passes compromise GRAMA changes after debate over 'vexatious requester' process

Salt Lake City — The Utah Senate passed a negotiated revision to the Government Records Access and Management Act on Feb. 24, approving the second substitute for Senate Bill 2 31 after lawmakers debated how the measure defines and would handle so‑called "vexatious requesters." Senator Bramble, sponsor of the substitute, said the bill reflects consensus language from media groups, the attorney general’s office and executive‑branch stakeholders and “provides a provision for establishing a process for a government entity to petition for relief against a vexatious requester.”

The bill requires governmental entities to conduct a "reasonable search" for records and clarifies that agencies may respond that no records exist rather than create a new document stating so. It also allows judicial review of State Records Committee decisions and authorizes courts to award reasonable attorney fees when a petition by a requester is found without merit; the substitute waives governmental immunity for such fee awards, the sponsor said.

Several senators questioned how the bill will work in practice. Senator Fillmore asked, “I didn't see a definition of vexatious requester in this bill. I wonder if it is defined elsewhere or if I missed it” (SEG 1022–1024). Bramble replied that the measure includes a process to address the problem and said the term is inherently contextual, arguing the target is individuals who "weaponize GRAMA" with numerous, purposeless requests that clog government operations (SEG 1031–1056). Senator Kwan confirmed related vexatious‑requester language from another bill was incorporated into the substitute (SEG 1073–1080).

Senator Weiler, who identified himself as an attorney who files GRAMA requests, said state agencies sometimes use GRAMA as a shield and expressed support for the legislation while noting broader transparency concerns (SEG 1096–1103). Senator Riebe warned that phrasing such as "unreasonably burdensome for the government entity" risks creating ambiguous outcomes and said she would vote for the bill despite reservations (SEG 1109–1124).

Bramble said the reasonable‑search requirement mirrors case law and was put into statute to reduce repeated litigation about whether agencies conducted adequate searches (SEG 1131–1136). After discussion, Bramble moved the second substitute and the Senate passed Second Substitute Senate Bill 2 31 by voice and roll call, 23 ayes, 0 nays, 6 absent; the bill will be sent to the House for consideration (SEG 1183–1186).

The bill’s primary changes — reasonable‑search language, a process to petition against vexatious requesters, judicial review and fee‑award provisions — were framed by the sponsor as balancing transparency with protection against abusive request practices. Senators who expressed concern said administrative rules and later rulemaking will be key to how the statute is applied. The sponsor indicated stakeholders expect an administrative‑rules process to establish the operational details cited during debate.

The Senate record shows the debate focused on process and statutory language rather than an ideological split; the vote was unanimous among those present. The bill’s next step is House consideration; the Senate’s action returns the measure to the House for further action.