Faced with harsh criticism from media professionals and government watchdogs, the California Senate voted June 24 to undo changes to the state’s Public Records Act that could have made obtaining government documents more difficult.
Earlier this month, the Legislature approved a bill included in the state budget that would have made responding to public records requests optional for local government. Legislators have since argued that the change was only intended as a cost-saving mechanism for the state, but many Californians didn’t see it that way.
Jim Ewert, general counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association, told the Sun that the bill—S.B. 71 and A.B. 76—would have enabled local government agencies to deny a request without giving a reason.
Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) explained why she approved the initial change in an interview just prior to the June 24 vote: “It was my understanding that the bill would have shifted fiscal responsibility [for fulfilling public records requests] from the state to local governments.”
Due to the current language of the Public Records Act, the state is mandated to reimburse local governments for the manpower costs of responding to requests for public information.
“Our governor is a penny-pincher. He was looking for any possible way to reduce costs,” Jackson said. “It raised quite a kerfuffle. … I can’t speak for the governor, but I can speak for the DF\emocrats in the Senate by saying that that wasn’t our intention.”
The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated the shift would save the state tens of millions of dollars. However, CNPA’s Ewert said local agencies have yet to submit any solid reimbursement figures.
The Legislature is expected to vote on a constitutional amendment to address fiscal responsibility for the Public Records Act. Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign the budget, including the revised S.B. 71, on July 1.
This article appears in Jun 27 – Jul 4, 2013.