Trump is an enemy of the press. California Democrats, like Newsom, may be no better | Opinion

California’s Supreme Court has famously declared that “openness in government is essential to the functioning of a democracy.” However, top state and local officials running our democracy don’t seem to be getting the message.

Recent examples abound.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration reflexively denies Public Records Act requests. Even on an innocuous measure to create an ombudsman to review record request denials, the governor vetoed the bill — despite a lack of any opposition to it in the legislature. Newsom cited the potential cost of the measure, overlooking the fact that watchdogs and citizens can use public records to expose wasteful spending by their government.

Opinion

At the local level, Sacramento city and county officials have dragged their feet in releasing police records revealing details about officer-involved shootings and police misconduct, even after a 2019 law provided for the release of such information.

And these aren’t isolated examples. Members of the California Public Utilities Commission commonly text each other when conducting important public business, hoping that, by doing so, they can avoid scrutiny of their actions — and their general failure to hold investor-owned utilities like PG&E to account.

CPUC Commissioners aren’t the only officials who like to use their “private” phones to text about public business; local officials up and down the state also engage in the practice.

Former San Jose Mayor Samuel Liccardo (who is now running for Congress) and former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs both lost court rulings in Public Records Act lawsuits seeking their communications about public business. In Liccardo’s case, he and the city of San Jose initially argued that when a public official uses a “private” phone to conduct public business, it isn’t a public record at all. The California Supreme Court rejected that argument, but Liccardo continued to conduct public business through texting on his “private” phone. A judge recently dealt Liccardo another setback, saying he hadn’t adequately searched for records.

Secrecy isn’t reserved for one political party. The oft-indicted former President Donald Trump has famously reviled the press as “vermin” and makes no secret of his disdain for anyone who would hold him accountable for his actions.

While state and local officials like Newsom don’t use Trump’s incendiary rhetoric, their claims to be transparent are nearly always all talk and no action. They, and state agencies like the State Parks Department, often employ flimsy claims of exemptions designed to preclude dissemination of information — to which the public is entitled — to hide waste, inefficiency and even corruption.

The State Parks Department in Sacramento delayed and resisted a simple Public Records Act request asking for information about its “Re-Examining Our Past Initiative,” a four-year-old project to look at contested place names and monuments to identify and possibly remove names and other materials deemed derogatory, inappropriate or lacking adequate historical context. After months of delay, the Parks Department released heavily redacted records, claiming it blacked out information because “district staff may not have the historical knowledge (or) context about the park units surveyed,” so “many of these notes may be uninformed” and they hadn’t been discussed, vetted or approved by higher-ups.

Given the Parks Department’s failure to make much progress in the four years since it launched the much-ballyhooed “Re-Examining Our Past Initiative,” its claims of exemptions from the Public Records Act seemed designed to conceal its relative inaction.

Is there any hope of ending this secrecy? Yes. State Sen. Dave Cortese (D-San Jose) has introduced Senate Bill 908, which would require state and local officials and employees to “use or copy” a government electronic device when they conduct public business — thus ensuring there’s a record of what government officials do when they text about public business. Federal officials are already required to “use or copy” a government server when they communicate about public business.

Cortese’s measure, SB 908, deserves the public’s support.

Karl Olson is a San Francisco lawyer who specializes in Public Records Act litigation and has successfully argued two PRA cases in the California Supreme Court. He is the recipient of the 2024 Career Achievement Award from the Northern California Society of Professional Journalists.