Legislative Update – What Happened This Week:
This bill would, commencing July 1, 2022, make every incident involving use of force to make a member of the public comply with an officer, force that is unreasonable, or excessive force subject to disclosure. The bill would require records relating to sustained findings of unlawful arrests and unlawful searches to be subject to disclosure. The bill would also require the disclosure of records relating to an incident in which a sustained finding was made by any law enforcement agency or oversight agency that a peace officer or custodial officer engaged in conduct involving prejudice or discrimination on the basis of specified protected classes.
The bill would require the retention of all complaints and related reports or findings currently in the possession of a department or agency. The bill would require that records relating to an incident in which an officer resigned before an investigation is completed to also be subject to release. For purposes of releasing records, the bill would prohibit assertion of the attorney-client privilege to limit the disclosure of factual information provided by the public entity to its attorney, factual information discovered by any investigation done by the public entity’s attorney, or billing records related to the work done by the attorney. The bill would expand the authorization to redact records to allow redaction to preserve the anonymity of victims and whistleblowers.
Next Step: Suspense file.
Action: Let your Senator know that you support access to police misconduct records.
AB-268 Courts: sealing records: autopsy reports
This bill would require the court, upon the request of a qualifying family member, to seal the autopsy report and any evidence associated with the examination of a person who was killed as a result of a criminal act when the above conditions apply or when a prosecutorial agency has concluded all persons who could have been prosecuted for the criminal act have died. The bill would also include within the definition of “qualifying family member” the victim’s next of kin, personal representative, child, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, or domestic partner.
The bill has been placed on the suspense file.
Next Step: The suspense file is expected to be taken up on May 20th.
Take Action: Visit the Publisher Resources page to view our fact sheet and sample editorial. Tell your Assemblymember why you oppose this bill and why they should too.
AB 361 (Rivas) Open meetings: local agencies: teleconferences
AB 361 passed committee by a vote of 7-0. This bill would authorize a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Ralph M. Brown Act when a legislative body of a local agency holds a meeting for the purpose of declaring or ratifying a local emergency, during a declared state of emergency or local emergency, as those terms are defined, when state or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, and during a declared local emergency provided the legislative body makes certain determinations by majority vote.
The bill would require legislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under these abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allow members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body. The bill would require the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from submitting public comments, until public access is restored.
Next Step: Assembly floor
Position: Oppose, Unless AmendedThis bill would, beginning July 1, 2022, make it unlawful for a business to fail to provide a consumer with a notice containing specified information if the consumer accepted a free gift or trial, lasting 31 or more days that was included in an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer or accepted an automatic renewal offer or continuous service offer at a promotional or discounted price, and the applicability of that price was more than 31 days. In these circumstances, the bill would require the notice to be provided at least 3 days before and at most 21 days before the expiration of the period of time for which the free gift or trial, or promotional or discounted price, applies.
We continue to work with a coalition to address our concerns.