BILL NUMBER: SB 1019	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 20, 2007
	AMENDED IN SENATE  MAY 30, 2007
	AMENDED IN SENATE  MARCH 26, 2007

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Romero
   (Coauthors: Senators Kuehl, McClintock, Migden, Ridley-Thomas, and
Scott)
   (Coauthor: Assembly Member Leno)

                        FEBRUARY 23, 2007

   An act to amend Section 832.7 of the Penal Code, relating to peace
officer records.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 1019, as amended, Romero. Peace officer records:
confidentiality.
   Existing law generally regulates the confidentiality of various
personnel records relating to peace and custodial officers.
   This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to abrogate
the California Supreme Court decision in Copley Press, Inc. v.
Superior Court and to restore public access to meetings and hearings
regarding peace officer discipline that were open prior to the Copley
Press decision.
   This bill would provide that notwithstanding specified statutory
provisions or the holding in Copley Press, Inc. v. Superior Court,
any city, county, city and county, or other local government entity
that employs  or reviews disciplinary actions imposed upon 
peace officers, or any state agency or state department, may elect,
through an ordinance  ,   regulation, or resolution,
 duly enacted, as specified, to follow the practices followed by
any city, county, city and county, or other local government entity
that employs peace officers, or any state agency or state department,
before the Copley Press decision with respect to the release of
limited information regarding certain personnel investigations,
subject to certain conditions.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 832.7 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
   832.7.  (a) Peace officer or custodial officer personnel records
and records maintained by any state or local agency pursuant to
Section 832.5, or information obtained from these records, are
confidential and shall not be disclosed in any criminal or civil
proceeding except by discovery pursuant to Sections 1043 and 1046 of
the Evidence Code. This section shall not apply to investigations or
proceedings concerning the conduct of peace officers or custodial
officers, or an agency or department that employs those officers,
conducted by a grand jury, a district attorney's office, or the
Attorney General's office.
   (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a department or agency shall
release to the complaining party a copy of his or her own statements
at the time the complaint is filed.
   (c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a department or agency that
employs peace or custodial officers may disseminate data regarding
the number, type, or disposition of complaints (sustained, not
sustained, exonerated, or unfounded) made against its officers if
that information is in a form which does not identify the individuals
involved.
   (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a department or agency that
employs peace or custodial officers may release factual information
concerning a disciplinary investigation if the officer who is the
subject of the disciplinary investigation, or the officer's agent or
representative, publicly makes a statement he or she knows to be
false concerning the investigation or the imposition of disciplinary
action. Information may not be disclosed by the peace or custodial
officer's employer unless the false statement was published by an
established medium of communication, such as television, radio, or a
newspaper. Disclosure of factual information by the employing agency
pursuant to this subdivision is limited to facts contained in the
officer's personnel file concerning the disciplinary investigation or
imposition of disciplinary action that specifically refute the false
statements made public by the peace or custodial officer or his or
her agent or representative.
   (e) (1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or the
holding in Copley Press, Inc. v. Superior Court (2006) 39 Cal.4th
1272, any city, county, city and county, local government entity,
state agency, or state department that employs  or reviews
disciplinary actions imposed upon  peace officers, may elect
through ordinance  ,   resolution,  or regulation,
duly enacted or adopted, to follow the practices that any city,
county, city and county, local government entity, state agency, or
state department that employs peace officers followed, with respect
to public hearings on, and the release of information regarding,
citizen complaints  , disciplinary actions,  and other
personnel investigations, prior to the Copley Press decision. If any
of those entities so elects, the local legislative body or the state
agency or state department shall find, based on the presentation of
substantial evidence, that the practices to be enacted or adopted and
followed do not provide for greater release of information than was
allowed by any city, county, city and county, local government
entity, state agency, or state department in California that employs
peace officers, prior to when the Copley Press decision became final.

   (2) A chief officer of the employing agency may certify in writing
that information otherwise rendered nonconfidential pursuant to
paragraph (1) be withheld from public disclosure only if the chief
officer expressly finds and publicly discloses facts that establish
all of the following:
   (A) On the facts of the particular case, there exists a threat to
officer safety or operational security that overrides the right of
public access to the information.
   (B) A threat to officer safety or operational security supports
nondisclosure of the information.
   (C) A substantial probability exists that the officer safety or
operational security will be jeopardized if the information is not
withheld.
   (D) The proposed withholding of information is narrowly tailored.
   (E) No less restrictive means exist to protecting officer safety
or operational security.
   (3) If the chief officer pursuant to paragraph (2) so certifies,
the commission or entity that is charged with reviewing the peace
officer discipline investigation may review the chief officer's
certification in closed session to determine whether or not to
override the certification.
   (f) (1) The department or agency shall provide written
notification to the complaining party of the disposition of the
complaint within 30 days of the disposition.
   (2) The notification described in this subdivision shall not be
conclusive or binding or admissible as evidence in any separate or
subsequent action or proceeding brought before an arbitrator, court,
or judge of this state or the United States.
   (g) Nothing in this section shall affect the discovery or
disclosure of information contained in a peace or custodial officer's
personnel file pursuant to Section 1043 of the Evidence Code.
  SEC. 2.  It is the intent of the Legislature, in amending Section
832.7 of the Penal Code during the 2007-08 Regular Session, to
abrogate the holding by the California Supreme Court in Copley Press,
Inc. v. Superior Court (2006) 39 Cal.4th 1272, to encourage
appropriate public disclosure of peace officer and custodial officer
personnel records in disciplinary matters, and to restore the public'
s right of access to meetings and hearings as it existed prior to the
Copley Press decision.