Assembly Member Pacheco's legislation refines California's peace officer records disclosure requirements by adding new court considerations for protecting undercover officers' identities. The measure amends the California Public Records Act's provisions on redacting law enforcement personnel records when disclosure could endanger officer safety.
Under the proposed changes, courts must specifically evaluate whether an officer is currently working undercover and requires anonymity when deciding whether to redact records. This consideration applies in cases where agencies demonstrate a specific, articulable reason that disclosure would create significant physical safety risks. The amendment maintains existing disclosure requirements for records related to use of force incidents, sustained findings of misconduct, and other matters already subject to public release.
The legislation preserves the core framework allowing public access to peace officer records while adding targeted protections for personnel in sensitive undercover roles. Courts retain discretion over redaction decisions but must now explicitly weigh the operational security needs of undercover officers as part of their determination process.
![]() Shannon GroveR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Brian JonesR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Mike McGuireD Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Eloise ReyesD Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Blanca RubioD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted |
Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.
Assembly Member Pacheco's legislation refines California's peace officer records disclosure requirements by adding new court considerations for protecting undercover officers' identities. The measure amends the California Public Records Act's provisions on redacting law enforcement personnel records when disclosure could endanger officer safety.
Under the proposed changes, courts must specifically evaluate whether an officer is currently working undercover and requires anonymity when deciding whether to redact records. This consideration applies in cases where agencies demonstrate a specific, articulable reason that disclosure would create significant physical safety risks. The amendment maintains existing disclosure requirements for records related to use of force incidents, sustained findings of misconduct, and other matters already subject to public release.
The legislation preserves the core framework allowing public access to peace officer records while adding targeted protections for personnel in sensitive undercover roles. Courts retain discretion over redaction decisions but must now explicitly weigh the operational security needs of undercover officers as part of their determination process.
Ayes | Noes | NVR | Total | Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
60 | 2 | 17 | 79 | PASS |
![]() Shannon GroveR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Brian JonesR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Mike McGuireD Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Eloise ReyesD Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() Blanca RubioD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted |