A fight over Hillary Clinton’s emails while she was Secretary of State has set off a nation-wide debate over what constitutes a public record.
The resolution of the case could have wide-ranging implications for local governments across California, and across the country.
Public officials have long used private email accounts to conduct government business, a tactic that watchdog groups say is used to avoid risking public disclosure of certain information.
The Sacramento Bee reports, “California law on the subject remains unsettled, leaving many public officials essentially free to conduct back-channel communication. The Legislature has made no moves to clarify the situation, and a court battle is raging in San Jose.”
“Ted Smith, a local activist, sued the city of San Jose after unsuccessfully setting out to inspect emails and text messages sent or received by officials on private devices or accounts.
Last March, the 6th District Court of Appeal held that the California Public Records Act does not require the city to produce messages from personal devices that are not accessible to an agency. Nor does it require the city to search those devices and accounts for messages relating to official business.
The showdown already has had an impact. Last summer, it was cited when the state health insurance exchange, Covered California, reviewed a request for emails between commissioners. The requests came from Consumer Watchdog, which at the time was campaigning for an ultimately unsuccessful statewide ballot measure to regulate health insurance rates.”