California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

AB 1039 — Racial and identity profiling: reporting: peace officer.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law, the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, requires the Attorney General to establish the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board (RIPA) to eliminate racial and identity profiling and to improve diversity and racial and identity sensitivity in law enforcement. Existing law requires the board, among other duties, to work in partnership with state and local law enforcement agencies to review and analyze racial and identity profiling policies and practices across geographic areas in California. Existing law requires each state and local agency that employs peace officers to annually report to the Attorney General data on all stops, as defined, conducted by the agency's peace officers for the preceding calendar year. Existing law requires the reporting to include specified information for each stop, including the time, date, and location of the stop; the reason for the stop; the perceived race or ethnicity, gender, and approximate age of the person stopped, provided that the identification of these characteristics be based on the observation and perception of the peace officer making the stop, and the information not be requested from the person stopped; and specified actions taken by the peace officer during the stop. Existing law requires that the data reported be available to the public, except for the badge number or other unique identifying information of the peace officer involved, which is released to the public only to the extent the release is permissible under state law. The California Public Records Act requires a state or local agency, as defined, to make public records available for inspection, subject to certain exceptions. Existing law provides that peace officer or custodial officer personnel records, as defined, and records maintained by any state or local agency relating to complaints against peace officers and custodial officers, or information obtained from those records, are confidential and prohibits the disclosure of those records in any criminal or civil proceeding except by discovery. Existing law describes exceptions to this policy for investigations or proceedings concerning the conduct of peace officers or custodial officers, or an agency or department that employs those officers, conducted by a grand jury, a district attorney's office, or the Attorney General's office. This bill would specify that the name or other means of identifying a peace officer in connection with the information that the peace officer collects pursuant to the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, as described above, is not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The bill would also state, in related provisions, that nothing in the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015 was or is intended to allow public access to, or disclosure of, that information, as specified. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those provisions. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.

  4. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  6. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. Read second time and amended.

  7. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  8. From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.

  9. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1039 do?
Existing law, the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, requires the Attorney General to establish the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory Board (RIPA) to eliminate racial and identity profiling and to improve diversity and racial and identity sensitivity in law enforcement. Existing law requires the board, among other duties, to work in partnership with state and local law enforcement agencies to review and analyze racial and identity profiling policies and practices across geographic areas in California. Existing law requires each state and local agency that employs peace officers to annually report to the Attorney General data on all stops, as defined, conducted by the agency's peace officers for the preceding calendar year. Existing law requires the reporting to include specified information for each stop, including the time, date, and location of the stop; the reason for the stop; the perceived race or ethnicity, gender, and approximate age of the person stopped, provided that the identification of these characteristics be based on the observation and perception of the peace officer making the stop, and the information not be requested from the person stopped; and specified actions taken by the peace officer during the stop. Existing law requires that the data reported be available to the public, except for the badge number or other unique identifying information of the peace officer involved, which is released to the public only to the extent the release is permissible under state law. The California Public Records Act requires a state or local agency, as defined, to make public records available for inspection, subject to certain exceptions. Existing law provides that peace officer or custodial officer personnel records, as defined, and records maintained by any state or local agency relating to complaints against peace officers and custodial officers, or information obtained from those records, are confidential and prohibits the disclosure of those records in any criminal or civil proceeding except by discovery. Existing law describes exceptions to this policy for investigations or proceedings concerning the conduct of peace officers or custodial officers, or an agency or department that employs those officers, conducted by a grand jury, a district attorney's office, or the Attorney General's office. This bill would specify that the name or other means of identifying a peace officer in connection with the information that the peace officer collects pursuant to the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015, as described above, is not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. The bill would also state, in related provisions, that nothing in the Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015 was or is intended to allow public access to, or disclosure of, that information, as specified. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those provisions. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 1039?
AB 1039 is sponsored by Quirk-Silva, Sharon (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 1039?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 1039?
Track AB 1039 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1039

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1039

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →