<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"A state Senate committee on Tuesday advanced a swiftly drafted constitutional amendment that would affirm the public's right to inspect documents held by local governments and clarifying that those agencies -- not the state -- should pay for making their records available.The amendment passed the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on a 7-0 vote.Representatives of local agencies told the panel they are concerned about the potential costs of complying with state public records requirements that could be expanded in the future.Those requirements do not apply to the Legislature, which is subject to a different set of open records rules, said Dan Carrigg of the League of California Cities.\"If this is good for local government, then it ought to be good for the Legislature,\" Carrigg said. \"We ought to have a similar standard.\"The legislation, SCA3, was written in response to a media outcry over changes that loosened requirements on how local governments handle requests for public information. The changes were approved as part of the state budget to save millions of dollars in reimbursement payments to those agencies.Lawmakers later voted to reverse the changes and maintain the current rules for records requests, including a provision giving agencies 10 days to respond. The replacement bill passed the Senate on Monday after clearing the Assembly last week.But without further action, the state remains potentially liable for ongoing costs accrued by cities, counties and school districts as they respond to requests for documents.The proposed constitutional amendment mandates that local governments and agencies comply with the California Public Records Act. It also specifies that the state would not have to reimburse those governments for the cost of complying with the law, potentially saving state government millions of dollars annually.The California Newspaper Publishers Association, California Common Cause and the state chapter of the League of Women Voters spoke in support of the amendment, saying it would clarify the right to public documents already contained in the state constitution.\"We see this as a once-and-for-all bill,\" said Tom Newton of the California Newspaper Publishers Association.Democrats have moved quickly on the constitutional amendment, announcing the proposal last Wednesday amid calls for the governor to veto thePublic Records Act changes previously sent to him by the Legislature. A draft of the amendment was released Friday.\"We just keep rushing in and then having to make corrections later,\" said Sen. Bill Emmerson, R-Redlands, who questioned the speed of the process and why the amendment already was before the committee.The proposal now awaits consideration in the Senate Appropriations Committee, which is scheduled to take it up later Tuesday. A Senate floor vote is expected on Thursday.The amendment requires a two-thirds vote in both chambers. If approved, it would go on the statewide ballot in June 2014.The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that it could cost the state tens of millions of dollars a year to reimburse local governments and agencies for complying with document requests.The costs stem from a May 2011 decision by the Commission on State Mandates, which determined that local agencies could seek state reimbursement for complying with certain provisions of the Public Records Act. The commission has not finished calculating reimbursement rates."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.kcra.com/article/senate-committee-passes-public-records-amendment/6405757>