BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SCA 3| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SCA 3 Author: Leno (D) and Steinberg (D), et al. Amended: 6/20/13 Vote: 27 PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT SENATE GOVERNANCE & FINANCE COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/25/13 AYES: Wolk, Knight, Beall, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Hernandez, Liu SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/25/13 AYES: De León, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Steinberg NO VOTE RECORDED: Padilla ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 9/10/13 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Public information SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This constitutional amendment places a measure on the ballot to amend the California Constitution (Cal. Const.) to require local agencies to comply with the California Public Records Act (PRA) and the Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act), and any subsequent amendments that further the constitutional provisions on public access to public agency meetings and records. This constitutional amendment exempts compliance with PRA and the Brown Act from state mandate claims. ANALYSIS : Section 3, Article I of the Cal. Const. states that CONTINUED SCA 3 Page 2 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 (Proposition 59, 2004). Cal. Const. further states that statutes, court rules, or other authorities must be broadly construed if they further the people's right of access, and narrowly construed if they limit the right of access. A statute, court rule, or other authority that limits the right of access must be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. Consistent with the Cal. Const., the Brown Act (AB 339, Brown, 1953) and PRA (AB 1381, Bagley, 1968) establish standards for public agencies' open and public meetings and public access to the agencies' records. The Brown Act requires the meetings of local governments' legislative bodies to be "open and public," thereby ensuring the people's access to information so they may retain control over the public agencies that serve them. The Brown Act prohibits closed meetings, with specified exceptions, and requires local agencies to post hearing notices, provide the public with copies of materials distributed during open meetings, and follow related provisions to enhance public awareness and access to the meetings and deliberations of local agencies' legislative bodies. This constitutional amendment places a measure on the ballot to amend the Cal. Const. to require local agencies to comply with the PRA and the Brown Act, and any subsequent amendments that further the constitutional provisions on public access to public agency meetings and records. This constitutional amendment exempts compliance with the PRA and the Brown Act from state mandate claims. Comments According to the author's office, this constitutional amendment provides that compliance with the PRA and the Brown Act is essential to implementation of Article 1 Section 3 (b) of the CONTINUED SCA 3 Page 3 Cal. Const., that compliance by local agencies with those laws is a matter of constitutional principle and not just a statutory mandate, and that, therefore, the costs incurred by local agencies for compliance with the statutes are not subject to reimbursement pursuant to Article XIII B as a state mandated local program. The author's office further explains that this constitutional amendment's cross-referencing of the statutory standards for compliance with the PRA and the Brown Act in Article I, Section 3 does not "constitutionalize" the PRA and Brown Act provisions in the sense that it directly adopts the words of those acts into the Cal. Const. and prevents future legislative amendment of the statutes. This constitutional amendment does not do that. Nor does this constitutional amendment "constitutionalize" the exemptions and limitations under those statutes. This constitutional amendment does not change the standards for compliance with those statutes, but instead provides that compliance with those provisions is a constitutional mandate and not a state reimbursable mandate under Section 6 of Article XIII B. According to the Senate Governance and Finance Committee analysis, this constitutional amendment will place a measure on the ballot clarifying that local agencies are responsible for the cost of complying with constitutional provisions that guarantee public access to the operations and records of local agencies and the corresponding requirements of the PRA and the Brown Act. This constitutional amendment will end long-standing concerns over how costs for local agency compliance with best practices for open government are distributed between the state and local agencies. If passed by the voters, this constitutional amendment will make clear that the state is responsible for its costs under the Cal. Const. and open meeting and open records laws and local agencies are responsible for their costs under the Cal. Const. and open meeting and open records laws. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 6/25/13) California Newspaper Publishers Association Common Cause Consumer Attorneys of California CONTINUED SCA 3 Page 4 ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 9/10/13 AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez NO VOTE RECORDED: Vacancy, Vacancy AB:kd 9/11/13 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED