BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair 2013-2014 Regular Session AB 634 (Gomez) As Amended June 15, 2014 Hearing Date: June 24, 2014 Fiscal: No Urgency: No TMW SUBJECT Public Records: Exception to Disclosure: Public Officials DESCRIPTION The California Public Records Act requires state and local agencies to make public records available for inspection by the public, with specified exceptions. One such exception prohibits a person, business, or association from publicly posting or displaying on the Internet the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official if that official has made a written demand to not have that information disclosed, and allows the elected or appointed official to designate the official's employer, a related governmental entity, or a voluntary professional association of similar officials to act as that official's agent to make that written demand. This bill would additionally permit the recognized collective bargaining representative of an appointed official who is a peace officer, as defined, a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney, to make a written demand for nondisclosure on behalf of that appointed official. BACKGROUND AB 2238 (Dickerson, Ch. 621, Stats. 2002) established the Public Safety Officials Home Protection Advisory Task Force to determine how to protect a public safety official's home information. The task force, chaired by the Attorney General and comprised of representatives from law enforcement, judges, district attorneys and public defenders, state recorders and assessors, and the business community involved in real estate (more) AB 634 (Gomez) Page 2 of ? transactions, filed its report with the Legislature in January 2004. Recommendation 15 of the report stated the need for legislation to prohibit any person, business, or association from commercially posting a public safety official's home address and telephone number on the Internet after receiving a written confidentiality report. In response, the Legislature enacted AB 1595 (Evans, Ch. 343, Stats. 2005) to prohibit the posting or display of specified elected and appointed officials' home address or telephone number on the Internet and to allow these officials to obtain an injunction against any person or entity that publicly posts or displays the information on the Internet. It also allowed for damages if the disclosure was made with intent to cause imminent great bodily harm. AB 32 (Lieu, Ch. 403, Stats. 2009) imposed further restrictions and increases penalties on the posting or display of a public official's home address or telephone number. This bill would authorize the recognized collective bargaining representative of an elected or appointed official who is a peace officer, a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney to make a non-disclosure demand on behalf of the official. CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW Existing law , the California Constitution, declares the people's right to transparency in government. ("The people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people's business, and therefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny....") (Cal. Const., art. I, Sec. 3.) Existing law , the California Public Records Act (CPRA), governs the disclosure of information collected and maintained by public agencies. (Gov. Code Sec. 6250 et seq.) Generally, all public records are accessible to the public upon request, unless the record requested is exempt from public disclosure. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.) There are 30 general categories of documents or information that are exempt from disclosure, essentially due to the character of the information, and unless it is shown that the public's interest in disclosure outweighs the public's interest in non-disclosure of the information, the exempt information may be withheld by the public agency with custody of the information. AB 634 (Gomez) Page 3 of ? Existing law defines state agency, for purposes of the CPRA, to include every state office, department, division, bureau, board, and commission or other state body or agency, except for the Legislature and the Judiciary. (Gov. Code Sec. 6252.) Existing law prohibits a state or local agency from posting the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(a).) Existing law prohibits a person from knowingly posting the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official, or of the official's residing spouse or child, on the Internet knowing that person is an elected or appointed official and intending to cause imminent great bodily harm that is likely to occur or threatening to cause imminent great bodily harm to that individual, and provides that a violation is a misdemeanor, unless the violation leads to the bodily injury of the official, or his or her residing spouse or child, in which case the violation is a misdemeanor or a felony. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(b).) Existing law prohibits a person, business, or association from publicly posting or publicly displaying on the Internet the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official if that official has made a written demand of that person, business, or association to not disclose his or her home address or telephone number. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(c)(1)(A).) Existing law states that a written demand made by a state constitutional officer, a mayor, or a Member of the Legislature, a city council, or a board of supervisors must include a statement describing a threat or fear for the safety of that official or of any person residing at the official's home address, and provides that written demand made by an elected official is effective for four years, regardless of whether or not the official's term has expired prior to the end of the four-year period. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(c)(1)(B), (C).) Existing law authorizes an elected or appointed official to designate in writing the official's employer, a related governmental entity, or any voluntary professional association of similar officials to act, on behalf of that official, as that official's agent with regard to making a written demand. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(c)(3).) AB 634 (Gomez) Page 4 of ? Existing law requires a written demand made by an official's agent to include a statement describing a threat or fear for the safety of that official or of any person residing at the official's home address. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(c)(3).) Existing law defines "elected or appointed official" to include, but is not limited to, all of the following: state constitutional officers; Members of the Legislature; judges and court commissioners; district attorneys; public defenders; members of a city council; members of a board of supervisors; appointees of the Governor; appointees of the Legislature; mayors; city attorneys; police chiefs and sheriffs; a public safety official; state administrative law judges; federal judges and federal defenders; and Members of the United States Congress and appointees of the President. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(f).) This bill would authorize an elected or appointed official who is a peace officer, as defined, a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney, to also designate his or her recognized collective bargaining representative to make a written non-disclosure demand on his or her behalf. This bill would also clarify that a person, business, or association is prohibited from publicly posting or publicly displaying on the Internet the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official if that official has, either directly or through a designated agent, made a written demand of that person, business, or association to not disclose his or her home address or telephone number. COMMENT 1. Stated need for the bill The author writes: Peace Officers and their families have been attacked at their homes. These officers take many precautions to keep their AB 634 (Gomez) Page 5 of ? loved ones out of harm's way. The state has recognized that there are those who seek retribution or for other criminal reasons seek to harm these officers [and/or] their families. Examples of such protections include the current law to allow a peace officer to individually request a removal from an internet posting, confidentiality from public posting of voter registration, DMV driver license and vehicle registrations etc. This measure expands that protection for Peace Officers by providing the authority to request removal from internet posting by their collective bargaining representative. 2. Extending authorization to a collective bargaining representative to make a non-disclosure demand Existing law authorizes an elected or appointed official to designate in writing the official's employer, a related governmental entity, or any voluntary professional association of similar officials to act, on behalf of that official, as that official's agent to make a written demand to a person, business, or association to not disclose the official's home address or telephone number on the Internet. (Gov. Code Sec. 6254.21(c)(3).) This bill would authorize an elected or appointed official who is a peace officer, as defined, a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney to also designate his or her recognized collective bargaining representative to make that written demand on the official's behalf. AB 32 (Lieu, Ch. 403, Stats. 2009), among other things, enacted the existing ability of the elected or appointed official to designate the employer, governmental entity, or voluntary professional association to submit the demand on behalf of the official. The problem at that time was data vendors refused to allow agents of public safety officials to opt-out under the provisions of Section 6254.21, claiming that the statute was silent with respect to agents and their powers, so data vendors would not acknowledge the agent's demands. This bill would additionally allow an elected or appointed official who is a peace officer, a District Attorney, or a Deputy District Attorney to "opt-out" of the information posting through a written demand by his or her recognized collective bargaining representative. As is required for a written demand by a constitutional officer, a mayor, a Member of the AB 634 (Gomez) Page 6 of ? Legislature, a city council member, or a member of a board of supervisors, or their agents, this written demand would include a statement describing the threat or fear for the safety of the official and persons residing at the official's home address. Since peace officers, District Attorneys, and Deputy District Attorneys who are members of unions necessarily utilize the services of their union representatives regarding work-related problems, this bill would authorize the union representative to submit the written demand on behalf of the peace officer. The union representative, like the official's employer, related governmental entity, or voluntary professional association, has information and a particular understanding of the official's situation. The authorization provided in this bill is in keeping with the existing authority allowing an official's employer, a related governmental entity, or any voluntary professional association of similar officials to make a demand. Support : American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO Opposition : None Known HISTORY Source : Deputy District Attorneys Association, Local AFSCME 39 Related Pending Legislation : AB 2206 (Gomez, 2014) is similar to this bill and would exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act the records of the residence or mailing address of any person described as a peace officer, if that person or his or her recognized collective bargaining representative has requested confidentiality of that information to a local agency, and that local agency chooses to maintain a program that redacts that information or makes that information confidential. AB 2206 is currently in the Assembly Committee on Local Government. Prior Legislation : AB 2299 (Feuer, 2012) would have authorized a county board of supervisors to establish a program that redacts public safety officials' names from property records, at the official's request. AB 2299 was held in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee. AB 634 (Gomez) Page 7 of ? AB 1813 (Lieu, Ch. 194, Stats. 2010) included the information provided to cellular phone applications in the information that a public official may ask to be removed from the Internet and to expand the definition of peace officer within the definition of public official. AB 32 (Lieu, Ch. 403, Stats. 2009) See Background; Comment 2. AB 1595 (Evans, Ch. 343, Stats. 2005) See Background. AB 2238 (Dickinson, Ch. 621, Stats. 2002) See Background. Prior Vote : Prior votes not relevant **************