Center for Advocacy Policy
Telephone {916) 442-1036
Fax (916] 44-2-1743

CENTER FOR ADVOCACY 81 POLICY
"ll i forn i a

March 28, 2019
The Honorable Laura Friedman Re: AB 700 as amended 3/18/19
California State Capitol, Room 2137 Oppose

Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Friedman:

The American Civil Liberties Union of California regrets that we must oppose your AB 700, which
proposes to conceal information in public colleges and universities relating to researchers and their
research by excluding it from the California Public Records Act (CPRA).

The CPRA re?ects a fundamental principle of democracy: in order for the government to be
re?ective of and responsive to the will of the people, the public must be allowed to know what the
government is up to. Absent some overriding interest, the people are entitled to know the conduct
of the people?s business in order to ?instruct their representatives, petition government for redress
of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good.? (Cal. Const., Art. 1, section
3.)

Our public colleges and universities have never been exempt from these rules, nor have their
faculty and researchers, or the data they create or analyze with public resources, or any other
activity they engage in while employed in their capacity as public servants. With the bene?ts of
public funding go the obligations of public accountability, just as surely for colleges and
universities as for any other government entity, and for researchers just as surely as engineers,
doctors, police of?cers or any of the myriad professions on the public payroll.

Despite your laudable goal to protect university researchers from harassment or distractions, or to
promote recruitment, collaboration and the acquisition of knowledge, we do not believe the pursuit
of truth and education is fostered by darkness rather than sunshine. If it is, the same theory would
apply equally to every type of government of?cial that undertakes any inquiry not only
university researchers and the CPRA would be severely undermined. We also resist the
suggestion that avoiding ?disruption? of government agencies is a valid reason for cloaking their
activities. We have been told that another reason for the bill is to protect university of?cials from
harm to their reputation. Assuming that is a legitimate objective, there are existing methods and
laws to address it. So too, if the concern is the protection of intellectual property, existing law
provides the means to do so.

Moreover, it is impossible to take the CPRA out of the hands of those who use it for purposes you
disapprove of without also extinguishing the rights of those who use the CPRA in the public
interest to uncover any number of wrongs. Indeed, the bill seems to rest on the belief that public
researchers and university administrators never lie, cheat, steal, commit fraud, falsify data, engage
in nepotism or other favoritism, discriminate on the basis of race, sex or other factors, misuse
public funds, take bribes, engage in unsafe practices, harm research subjects, or commit any other
type of misconduct. Sadly, the University of California and other state higher educational

 

ACLU of Northern California ACLU of Southern California ot'San Diego 8; imperial Counties
Abdi Diluctor l-feci'ol Villrig'r'a, Diiuutm' Nor ma Chuvei?F?etut :3Dr'1. Executive Director
(39 Drumi'rl Sting-ct ?II-ill?- EigliLi'i Street PO. Htax 8713']
San CA 94111 Ice. Ar'igelcs. CA Sim Diego. CA 92138

{415) 5'31 2493 (9?13) 9779?9300 (619) 

institutions have not been immune from academic fraud, wrongful tenure decisions, personnel
abuses, admissions scandals, kick-backs, membership on corporate boards of directors and other
improper arrangements.

For these reasons, we must respectfully oppose AB 700. Please do not hesitate to contact us should
you have any questions or concerns.

Si ely,
Kev . aker
Legi ,lative Director

cc: Members and Committee Staff, Assembly Judiciary Committee