Principles for Public Safety Employment

modeled, the general policy of the Act favors disclosure. 371 Support for refusal to disclose information “must be found, if at all, among the specific exceptions to the general policy that are enumerated in the Act.” 372 The Act applies to “public records,” which are defined as “any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics.” 373 The mere custody of a writing by a public agency does not make it a public record, but if a record is kept by an officer because it is necessary or convenient to the discharge of his official duty it is a public record. 374 Government Code Section 6253 provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency, and every citizen has a right to inspect any public record except as specifically exempted from disclosure at Government Code Section 6254. Every agency may adopt reasonable regulations stating the procedures to be followed when requesting to inspect agency records. However, since the reason for the citizen’s request is irrelevant, the agency may not regulate access on that basis. Section 6254 provides exemptions to the disclosure requirements of the Act for certain records. The exemptions are designed to protect privacy interests of individuals whose data or documents come into governmental possession. 375 California courts have construed the statutory exemptions narrowly in order to accomplish the general policy of disclosure. 376 Importantly, Section 6254(c) exempts personnel, medical or similar files if the disclosure would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” Furthermore, under Government Code Section 6254.3, the home addresses and home telephone numbers of state employees and employees of school districts and county offices of education shall not be open to public inspection, except in specifically delineated situations. However, Section 6254.8 also provides that employment contracts between a public employer and a public official/employee are public records and are not exempt from disclosure. In Braun v. City of Taft 377 , the Court held that two letters in an employee’s personnel file which appointed that employee to a certain position and then rescinded it were public records since the letters constituted an employment contract. 378 The Court also noted that salary information was public information and suggested that home addresses and phone numbers, birth date, social security and credit union numbers, although personal, were not in any way embarrassing. 379 The implication was that the public may be entitled to such information. The Court in Braun also stated that Section 6524(c) cannot be interpreted as exempting an entire file from disclosure where only a portion of the file contains documents whose disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. 380 The Court would probably not reach the same conclusion now because of the prevalence of identity theft. Moreover, as stated in the Court by State Bd. of Equalization v. Superior Court 381 “the fact that a public record may contain some confidential information does not justify withholding the entire document.” The courts will employ a balancing test in determining whether records should be exempt from disclosure under Section 6254(c) and weigh the individual’s right to privacy against the right of the public to oversee the actions of governmental employees. 382

Principles for Public Safety Employment ©2022 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 114