BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1696|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1696
Author: Yee (D)
Amended: 4/1/08
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 4-1, 3/25/08
AYES: Corbett, Harman, Kuehl, Steinberg
NOES: Ackerman
SUBJECT : California Public Records Act: disclosure
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill prohibits a state or local agency from
allowing another party to control the disclosure of
information that is otherwise subject to disclosure under
the California Public Records Act. In addition, the bill
specifies that regardless of any contract term to the
contrary, a contract for the purpose of conducting a
review, audit, or report between a private entity and a
state or local agency, including the University of
California, is subject to the same disclosure requirements
and exceptions as other public records act under the
California Public Records Act, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, the California Public Records
Act (CPRA), requires that a state or local agency make all
public records available for inspection upon request by a
person, subject to specified exemptions.
CONTINUED
SB 1696
Page
2
This bill provides that a state or local agency may not
allow another party to control the disclosure of
information that is otherwise subject to disclosure under
the CPRA.
This bill declares this to be existing law.
Existing law provides exemptions for public records from
disclosure under the CPRA. Some exemptions include
personnel, medical, or similar files, the disclosure of
which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy, records pertaining to pending litigation, employee
relations records, and major risk medical insurance program
records.
This bill provides that a contract, regardless of any
contract term to the contrary, for the purpose of
conducting a review, audit, or report, between a private
entity and a state or local agency, including the
University of California, is subject to the same disclosure
requirements and exemptions as other public records under
the CPRA.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/1/08)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME) Local 3299
California Newspaper Publishers Association
California Nurses Association
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters of this bill contend
that this bill helps provide disclosure under the CPRA.
Referring to the UCSF incident, the California Newspaper
Publishers Association states, "[t]he denial of a request
by a government agency claiming that a provision in an
agreement prevents it from executing its duties under the
law stands this central tenet of the CPRA on its head? SB
1696 would block this ? strategy while safeguarding the
essential principles of public accessibility and
accountability in the CPRA that have been established for
SB 1696
Page
3
40 years."
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights contend
that this bill "would remove any possible doubt about the
administrators' responsibilities to the public. It is
unfortunate that the UC officials must be reminded of their
obligations as public servants, but clearly this is the
case."
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME) Local 3299 believe that "it is crucial
that the public have the right to obtain information on
government agencies if there is to be true oversight of
public agencies. [This] legislation is crucial to ensuring
that state and local agencies, including the University of
California, are not able to shield information from the
public by simply entering into confidentiality agreements
[that allow the other party to control disclosure of
information]."
RJG:cm 4/2/08 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****