What lawmakers deem as necessary housekeeping to modernize Utah's public records law would minimize public involvement in government business, a coalition of local news outlets says.

The Deseret Morning News, Salt Lake Tribune, KSL, Utah Press Association and the Society of Professional Journalists is calling for a group of nine state representatives and five senators to reject the proposals. The lawmakers are set to meet Tuesday for a sixth and final time to put the finishing touches on three proposed bills that would change how the public accesses government information — from the Legislature to the smallest town council.

The task force co-chairmen, Sen. David Thomas, R-South Weber, and Rep. Doug Aagard, R-Kaysville, said the 13-year-old Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA) needs a comprehensive review, particularly in two key areas: There is no clear guidance on how governments should deal with technological ad- vances, such as digital databases and e-mail; and a growing perception among lawmakers that GRAMA is being used to harass government agencies or by attorneys gathering background information for lawsuits. There is also growing concern that business marketers are culling out private citizen information.

When the law was passed, "they only began to contemplate the value of data and they only began to comprehend the explosion of e-mail," Aagard said, adding that he knows of citizens filing repeated but unnecessary records requests just to swamp city workers with retrieving the information. Those concerns, combined with private information being used by marketers, prompted the creation of the task force, Aagard said.

Despite being "beaten up pretty good in the media," Thomas said most of GRAMA will remain intact. "We're not talking about dramatically changing GRAMA."

Several other groups representing title companies, appraisers, consumer credit bureaus, open government advocates and insurance companies see enough change to worry them that people buying homes or their agents would be prohibited from background information routinely obtained now.

One local development company has accused one of the co-chairmen of failing to disclose what it considers a conflict of interest.

Attorneys for Anderson Development, which is currently locked in a legal battle with Summit County officials over a development, say that Thomas — an assistant Summit County attorney — stands to benefit from changes to GRAMA by shielding county documents and e-mails from Anderson's requests for copies.

"He's just trying cover his tracks" said Anderson attorney Michael Hutchings. "David Thomas does not want e-mails of county and local government to be discovered because these e-mails often tell the true story of what's being done at taxpayer expense."