Put on the Ballot by the Legislature
Requires local government compliance with laws providing for public access to local government body meetings and records of government officials. Eliminates reimbursement for costs of compliance. Fiscal Impact: Reductions in state payments to local governments in the tens of millions of dollars annually. Potential future costs on local governments in the tens of millions of dollars annually.
WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS
YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The state would not be required to pay local governments for costs to follow state laws that give the public access to local government information.
NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The state would still be required to pay local governments for certain costs of providing public access to local government information.
ARGUMENTS
PRO: Proposition 42 will cement in the Constitution the public’s right to know what the government is doing and how it is doing it. Local agencies shouldn’t be allowed to deny a request for public information or slam a meeting door shut based on cost. Vote YES on Proposition 42.
CON: Proposition 42 would amend the California Constitution to impose the cost of complying with the California Public Records Act and local open meeting laws upon the local governments involved. An alternative, not offered by this proposition, would be to impose the cost upon the state government.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
FOR: Peter Scheer
First Amendment Coalition
534 Fourth St. #B
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 460-5060
pscheer@firstamendmentcoalition.org
www.cnpa.com/prop42
AGAINST: Gary Wesley
gary.wesley@yahoo.com
CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF REPUBLICAN WOMEN POSITION:
Prop 41 is the easy answer, not the right answer. We OPPOSE Prop 41!
By contrast, Prop 42 is a straightforward bill. The CFRW Voting Body voted to SUPPORT Prop 42. Prop 42 is called the California Compliance of Local Agencies with Public Records Act. It would require that all local agencies comply with the California Public Records Act (CPRA) and the Brown Act. A good question would be: why weren’t localities already complying with these important transparency acts? Prop 42 would guarantee a private citizen’s right to open, public records and to attend public meetings. This could save the state millions of dollars by eliminating the requirement that the state reimburse local agencies for compliance with these laws. Now the local agencies must comply with these transparency laws and will be incentivized to keep costs down since the state will no longer reimburse costs. In an increasingly paperless world, most local agencies should make their records available online to keep costs low and transparency high. We SUPPORT Prop 42!
