New York Senate Bill S06852

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/25/25
• Refer: 3/25/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Requires each public body to live stream and post video recordings of all open meetings and public hearings; requires each public body to post such recordings for a period of not less than five years.

Summary

S06852 would amend New York’s Public Officers Law to require public bodies, to the extent practicable, to livestream all open meetings and public hearings on their websites in real time. It also requires those bodies to post video recordings of each open meeting and hearing on their websites within five business days and keep those recordings available for at least five years. The bill is aimed at expanding public access to government proceedings by making meetings easier to watch live and review later. It applies broadly to public bodies in New York and would create a uniform statewide expectation for online streaming and archiving of open meetings and hearings.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would add a new transparency requirement to Section 104 of the Public Officers Law, effectively expanding the obligations of public bodies beyond in-person notice and access rules. Public bodies would need to maintain the technical capacity to livestream meetings where practicable, upload recordings promptly, and preserve them for a five-year period, which could affect municipalities, agencies, boards, and other covered entities.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be a government transparency and public access proposal, which typically draws support from open-government advocates and may raise implementation concerns among local governments and agencies responsible for compliance.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the practical burden of compliance, especially the phrase “to the extent practicable,” which suggests some flexibility but also leaves room for disagreement over when livestreaming is required. Potential concerns include equipment costs, staffing, internet reliability, and the administrative burden of storing and maintaining recordings for five years. Supporters would likely emphasize transparency, accountability, and easier public participation, while opponents or cautious stakeholders may focus on cost and feasibility for smaller public bodies.