Smart Voter Your Ballot & Poll Place On Propositions Ballot Measure Analysis Pros & Cons Prop 1A Prop 65 Prop 59 Prop 66 Prop 60 Prop 67 Prop 60A Prop 68 Prop 61 Prop 69 Prop 62 Prop 70 Prop 63 Prop 71 Prop 64 Prop 72 PDF In Depth Prop 1A Prop 65 Prop 59 Prop 66 Prop 60 Prop 67 Prop 60A Prop 68 Prop 61 Prop 69 Prop 62 Prop 70 Prop 63 Prop 71 Prop 64 Prop 72 About Ballot Measures Background How to Evaluate State Bond Debt The Initiative Process Other Absentee Voting Register to Vote

PUBLIC RECORDS, OPEN MEETINGS
Legislative Constitutional Amendment

QUESTION

Should the California Constitution be amended to give people the right to access information concerning meetings and writings of state and local government bodies, officials, and agencies as long as constitutional rights of privacy and due process are protected?

BACKGROUND

The State Constitution generally does not address the public's access to government information. California, however, has a number of state statutes that provide for the public's access to government information, including documents and meetings.

Access to Government Documents. There are two basic laws that provide for the public's access to government documents:

• The California Public Records Act establishes the right of every person to inspect and obtain copies of state and local government documents. The act requires state and local agencies to establish written guidelines for public access to documents and to post these guidelines at their offices.

• The Legislative Open Records Act provides that the public may inspect legislative records. The act also requires legislative committees to maintain documents related to the history of legislation.

Access to Government Meetings. There are several laws that provide for the public's access to government meetings:

• The Ralph M. Brown Act governs meetings of legislative bodies of local agencies. The act requires local legislative bodies to provide public notice of agenda items and to hold meetings in an open forum.

• The Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act requires that meetings of state bodies be conducted openly and that documents related to a subject of discussion at a public meeting be made available for inspection.

• The Grunsky-Burton Open Meeting Act requires that meetings of the Legislature be open to the public and that all persons be allowed to attend the meetings.

Some Information Exempt From Disclosure. While these laws provide for public access to a significant amount of information, they also allow some information to be kept private. Many of the exclusions are provided in the interest of protecting the privacy of members of the public. For instance, medical testing records are exempt from disclosure. Other exemptions are provided for legal and confidential matters. For instance, governments are allowed to hold closed meetings when considering personnel matters or conferring with legal counsel.

PROPOSAL

This measure adds to the State Constitution the requirement that meetings of public bodies and writings of public officials and agencies be open to public scrutiny. The measure also requires that statutes or other types of governmental decisions, including those already in effect, be broadly interpreted to further the people's right to access government information. The measure, however, still exempts some information from disclosure, such as law enforcement records. Under the measure, future governmental actions that limit the right of access would have to demonstrate the need for that restriction.

The measure does not directly require any specific information to be made available to the public. It does, however, create a constitutional right for the public to access government information. As a result, a government entity would have to demonstrate to a somewhat greater extent than under current law why information requested by the public should be kept private. Over time, this change could result in additional government documents being available to the public.

FISCAL EFFECT

Government entities incur some costs in complying with the public's request for documents. Entities can charge individuals requesting this information a fee for the cost of photocopying documents. These fees, however, do not cover all costs, such as staff time to retrieve the documents. By potentially increasing the amount of government information required to be made public, the measure could result in some minor annual costs to state and local governments.

WHAT A YES OR NO VOTE MEANS

A YES vote means that Californians would have a constitutional right to access to government information. A government entity would have to demonstrate to a greater extent than heretofore why information requested by the public should be kept private.

A NO vote means the right to access to information regarding government actions will remain the same and will not be added to the California Constitution.

SUPPORTERS SAY

• People need open, reasonable, and accountable government.
• The public's right to access information has been eroded by special interest legislation and by the courts, which have put the burden on the public to justify disclosure.
• Proposition 59 ensures that private information about individuals will remain private..

OPPONENTS SAY

• The current level of government information available to the public is acceptable and does not require a constitutional amendment.
• Proposition 59 exempts from disclosure records deemed private by the courts and records of the California Legislature and its employees.
• Proposition 59 does not go far enough and its passage might prevent a stronger law from being enacted.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION

Official ballot arguments in support are signed by Mike Machado, State Senator; Jacqueline Jacobberger, President, League of Women Voters of California; Peter Sheer, Executive Director, California First Amendment Coalition; Thomas W. Newton, General Counsel, California Newspaper Association; and John Russo, City Attorney, City of Oakland.

Official ballot arguments in opposition are signed by Gary B. Wesley, Attorney at Law.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Supporters

Coalition for Open Government, (916) 327-9178, www.yesonprop59.org

Opponents

Gary Wesley, Attorney at Law, (408) 882-5070

Send comments concerning the format or usability of this page to lwvc@vcwatts.org