PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WPRI) -- Transparency advocates are sounding the alarm as a provision of the Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights reform bill that's making its way through the legislature would require police to keep secret certain body-worn video.

The advocates, including Access/RI, Common Cause Rhode Island, East Bay Media Group, the New England First Amendment Coalition and the ACLU of Rhode Island, argue the hotly contested reform bill that's supposed to improve transparency around police misbehavior would actually make some cases more opaque.

"It is deeply troubling and sadly ironic that, as a result of this provision, a bill designed to promote greater police transparency does the opposite," the advocates wrote in a recently released memo.

"Unlike LEOBOR, police body-worn cameras are a fairly new feature of policing in Rhode Island," they added. "Prohibiting the release of a wide swath of video sets a troubling precedent and undermines the very purpose of having the cameras."

The group points to a provision in the bill that would prohibit police chiefs from releasing any video evidence in cases involving "minor" violations of department rules, even if that video is currently accessible under the state's Access to Public Records Act.

The legislation, however, doesn't define what constitutes a "minor" violation, which the group said could open the door for police to keep secret video that could otherwise be made public.

"Whichever way it is defined, and whether intentional or not, it creates a gaping hole in police accountability and transparency," the group writes.

The advocates offered three examples of how the provision could allow police to shield information, including whenever an officer uses inappropriate language. Video would also be kept secret whenever officers don't turn on their body-worn cameras in a timely fashion, and whenever a chief concludes excessive force allegations don't rise to the level of criminality, according to the advocates.

The legislation is currently under consideration in the R.I. Senate where the advocates are calling on lawmakers to delete the language from the bill.

"Otherwise, an extremely important mechanism for holding the police accountable when they engage in 'minor' violations of conduct will be lost, and questionable police conduct will be forever blocked off from any public scrutiny even though it previously might have been accessible through APRA," they wrote.

In a joint statement, House Speaker Joe Shekarchi and Senate President Dominick Ruggerio pushed back on the idea the legislation as written would change anything about the state's access to public records law.

"In fact, any video, including video from a body camera, document, record or other information, would continue to be accessible to the press and/or public through the provisions of the Access to Public Records Act," they said. "The language in the bill does not change access to this information, and only relates to disclosure by the police chief in circumstances where the officer is suspended for minor violations."

They also pointed to other changes in the reform bill they argued will improve the current law, including increasing suspensions of officers from two days to a maximum of five days.

"This suspension is for minor violations of department policies and operates as any other discipline would in any other workplace," they said. "As a human resources matter, any remedy from this discipline is not through LEOBOR but through the collective bargaining agreement as an employment issue."