BILL ANALYSIS �
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
**************