BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 32|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 32
Author: Lieu (D)
Amended: 6/17/09 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/23/09
AYES: Corbett, Harman, Florez, Leno, Walters
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 5/21/09 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Public officials: personal information
SOURCE : Jim Brandlin, Judge of the Los Angeles County
Superior
Court
DIGEST : This bill expands current law relative to the
personal information of an elected or appointed official
by:
1.Allowing an agent, as defined, of the public official
whose information was publicly posted or displayed to
make the written demand for the removal of the Internet
posting of the official's home address or telephone
number.
2.Requiring a person or business that receives a written
demand from a covered public official or the official's
CONTINUED
AB 32
Page
2
designated agent, within 48 hours of receiving the
official's or official's agent's written demand, to
remove the official's home address or telephone number
from public display posted on the Internet and to ensure
it is not reposted on the same Internet site, a
subsidiary Internet site, or another site maintained by
the same person or business, or transferred to another
person, business or association.
3.Authorizes a civil penalty of $1,000 for a violation of
an injunction or declaratory relief issued by a court
ordering removal of an official's home address or
telephone number from an Internet site.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides that no state or local
agency shall post the same address or telephone number of
any elected or appointed official on the Internet without
first obtaining the written permission of that individual.
(Government Code Section 6254.21(a).)
Existing law prohibits the public posting or display of
specified elected or appointed officials' home address or
telephone number on the Internet upon written demand by a
state constitutional officer, a mayor, or a member of the
Legislature or of a city council or a board of supervisors,
describing a threat or fear for the safety of the official
or members of the official's household. This written
demand is effective for four years. (Government Code
Section 6254.21(c).)
Existing law permits specified elected or appointed
officials to seek an injunction against any person or
entity that publicly posts on the Internet the home address
or telephone number of that official. The court or jury
that finds a violation is required to grant declaratory or
injunctive relief, plus attorney's fees and court costs.
(Government Code Section 6254.21(c)(E)(2).)
This bill permits an elected or appointed official to
designate the official's employer 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 for the removal of the
posted home address or telephone number from the Internet
AB 32
Page
3
site.
This bill requires a person, business, or association, upon
receiving the written demand of an elected or appointed
official or agent, to remove the official's home address or
telephone number from public display on the Internet within
48 hours of receipt of the written demand and to continue
to ensure that information is not reposted on the same
Internet site, any subsidiary site or other site maintained
by the recipient of the written demand, or transferred to
another person or entity.
Existing law states that no person shall knowingly post 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. A violation
of this subdivision is a misdemeanor. A violation of this
subdivision that leads to the bodily injury of the
official, or his or her residing spouse or child, is an
alternate felony/misdemeanor. (Government Code Section
6254.21(b); Penal Code Section 76(a).)
Existing law prohibits the solicitation, sale, or trading
of an elected or appointed official's home address or
telephone number with intent to cause imminent great bodily
harm to the official or a resident at the official's home
address, permits that official to bring an action in any
court of competent jurisdiction, and requires the court
finding a violation to award damages of up to three times
the actual damages but in no case les than $4,000.
(Government Code Section 6254.21(d)(1) and (d)(2).)
This bill authorizes a court to impose a civil penalty of
$1,000 for any violation of an injunction or declaratory
relief issued by the court, ordering the removal of a
public official's posted home address or telephone number
from the Internet.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
AB 32
Page
4
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/6/09)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing
Officers in State Employment
California District Attorneys Association
California State Sheriffs' Association
County of Los Angeles Sheriff Leroy Baca
Judicial Council of California
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Colley
Los Angeles County Police Protective League
Los Angeles County Probation Officers Union
Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, Inc.
Los Angeles Police Protective League
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author's office states, "Over
the past decade, many law enforcement officers, judges,
district attorneys, and public defenders have been
threatened or harmed at their homes. In particular, every
murder of a federal judge in the 20th century occurred at
the federal judge's home by assailants who were able to
access the victim's personal information. (Citation
omitted.) Although no central repository of information
exists to catalog all incidents of threats or violence,
leading researchers link the easy access of personal
information about public safety officials as a significant
factor to consider in calculating threat assessment.
(Citation omitted.)
"?AB 32 seeks to resolve frequent reposting of information
by establishing a duty on the data vendor to maintain a
suppression list, cross-reference new information against
the list and prohibit any transfers of that information to
another website.
"AB 32 builds upon the current opt-out for public safety
officials who do not want their home address or telephone
number posted on the Internet. Specifically, this bill
AB 32
Page
5
prescribes:
"-- Data vendors must immediately remove the official's
information after receiving the written demand;
"-- Data vendors ensure that the information is not
re-posted on their website or any subsidiary website.
"-- Prohibits a data vendor from transferring the
information to another website or data vendor; and
"-- Allows the public safety official to designate their
employer or a voluntary organization of similar officials
as an agent to act on behalf of the official under the
opt-out provisions."
Judge Brandlin of the Los Angeles Superior Court, sponsor
of this bill, states:
"Most Internet data vendors have been good corporate
citizens and have cooperated [in enforcing the opt-out
rights of public officials], but some have not. Some
Internet data vendors have reposted removed information
within weeks or even days, placing the safety of our judges
and their families at risk.
"A few Internet data vendors have absolutely refused to
remove the information at the request of the Administrative
Office of the Courts - Office of Emergency Response and
Security - and have demanded that each judicial officer
communicate their individual demand directly with the
vendor. This has created a huge time-consuming burden upon
individual judges and staff to comply with these
requirements.
"There is a great economy of effort in permitting a willing
public safety officials' employer or professional
association, typically a single staff person, to perform
this task for their employees and officials rather than
requiring all public safety officials to have to
individually identify all known Internet data vendors and
communicate with them directly.
"As a matter of good public policy, it is better to have
AB 32
Page
6
these Internet data vendors (who make millions of dollars
per year selling this information) responsible for keeping
the home addresses and telephone numbers of requesting
public safety officials from being reposted rather than
diverting the attention and resources of the government to
attempt to ensure compliance with the law. Enhancing the
remedies for a violation of any of the provisions of the
statute will also assist in ensuring compliance by
providing those companies with a financial disincentive for
disobeying the law."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Duvall, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher,
Fong, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,
Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Krekorian, Lieu,
Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, John A. Perez, V. Manuel
Perez, Portantino, Price, Ruskin, Salas, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson,
Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuentes, Nava, Saldana
RJG:cm 7/6/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****