New York state lawmakers have restarted discussions on repealing section 50-a of the state Civil Rights Law, which has been used to shield the personnel records of law enforcement officers from the public, including reports of alleged misconduct. 

Democrats held a hearing in Albany on the issue Thursday, where testimony ranged from members of law enforcement to families of individuals killed during an interaction with police.

The range of witnesses at the hearing also came with a spectrum of opinions on the issue. Some called for it to remain unchanged out of fear that officers would otherwise be placed in harm's way, while others favored repealing the law entirely to promote transparency.

The hearing was hosted by the State Senate Codes Committee, which is chaired by Sen. Jamaal Bailey, D-Bronx. Bailey, throughout the hearing, challenged claims by members of law enforcement that a repeal of 50-a would put the personal information of police officers at risk.

"In the minority of officers, if something happens at their hands, we should know what's happening," Bailey said. "That's all we're saying. I don't want personal records out, I don't want your addresses."

Section 50-a, as it's been interpreted by the courts, essentially shields the public from accessing the personnel records of police officers, firefighters and correction officers, including allegations of misconduct and disciplinary actions.

Democrats in the state Legislature have sought to either repeal or modify the law in the last several years, but have yet to gain the momentum to do so. Republicans, who controlled the State Senate until this year, were against the measure.

Among those who testified in favor of a repeal was Gwen Carr, the mother of Eric Garner, who was killed five years ago on Staten Island during an interaction with police and incited a rallying cry among the Black Lives Matter movement with his last words: "I can't breathe."

During her testimony, Carr reacted to news that Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who was fired this year over Garner's death, had filed a lawsuit late Wednesday against the New York City Police Department to get his job back.

"This is ridiculous but it doesn't surprise me," Carr said. "We knew he would try that."

She was joined at the hearing by Valerie Bell and Constance Malcolm, whose children were also killed during interactions with police. They testified that, because of 50-a, they've been blocked from learning, exactly, what happened to their children and the officers involved.

Carr testified that, if it weren't for leaks to the press, she wouldn't have learned the findings of an administrative judge within the NYPD who recommended earlier this year that Pantaleo be fired. That finding wasn't released publicly at the time.

"I need you to understand that 50-a is harming me and my family still every day," Carr said.

The NYPD testified at the hearing Thursday that they don't disagree that certain records should be made available to the public, but that the context of those claims matters. 

NYPD Assistant Deputy Commissioner Oleg Chernyavsky testified that the department supports an amendment, or modification, of the law to allow public disclosure of records involving cases of serious misconduct but that smaller, administrative errors should be kept private.

"Transparency need not come at the cost of officer safety, and officer safety need not come at the cost of transparency," Chernyavsky testified.

The NYPD's proposal, as Chernyavsky explained it, would still shield the personnel records of police officers in cases where allegations of misconduct are made, but the facts of an incident aren't yet fully known. Those records would be released, however, at the end of the disciplinary process. 

Other records, like smaller, administrative violations and when disclosure may threaten public safety, would still be kept private under the proposal.

That's different from the position of the Police Benevolent Association of the City of New York, better known as the PBA, which has argued that police officers would be left open to harassment and potential physical harm if any personnel records are made available.

PBA president Patrick Lynch wrote in testimony submitted to the state Legislature last week that efforts to repeal the law have been based on false claims that disciplinary records are kept under lock and key. Those claims aren't true, he wrote.

Individuals and agencies tasked with overseeing police officers, including when they're accused of a crime, have access to those records despite the law, Lynch wrote. That includes the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board, the body charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against police officers in the five boroughs, and others, like prosecutors. 

State law also allows the disciplinary records of police officers to be accessed by any individual through a court order or if the relevant officers gives their consent, Lynch wrote.

Allowing broader disclosure of the personnel records of law enforcement would endanger the safety and reputation of those officers, he wrote.

"Supporters of repeal completely ignore the serious risks to police officer safety and the reputational harm of publishing false allegations—which will unfairly impact the careers of good police officers who keep all New Yorkers safe," Lynch wrote.

Democrats who led the hearing Thursday said they didn't intend to craft the new law in a way that would expose any personal information of police officers, like addresses or phone numbers, and didn't expect that to happen, anyway.

Assemblyman Daniel O'Donnell, D-Manhattan, who sponsors legislation to repeal 50-a, said during the hearing that the state's public officers and freedom of information laws would shield that kind of personal information from the public, regardless of his proposal. 

"I think there's a difference between personnel records and personal records," O'Donnell said.

That was in response to testimony heard Thursday from representatives of the various police unions that exist outside New York City. Michael O'Meara, president of the New York State Association of Police Benevolent Associations, echoed Lynch's argument.

"Everyone with a legitimate interest in information about a police officer's file has the opportunity to obtain it," O'Meara said.

He argued that a repeal of 50-a would actually have a chilling effect on public safety because defense attorneys could use the various disciplinary records of police officers to build a case against the prosecution. That could leave defendants off the hook, he said, which would disenfranchise victims.

Lawmakers return to Albany for next year's legislative session in January, after which they'll have about five months to consider changes to the law.

READ MORE: