In Essick v. County of Sonoma, published June 29, 2022, the First District Court of Appeal, Division 4 affirmed a trial court's denial of a preliminary injunction in a reverse-CPRA case. A county supervisor lodged with the county administrator a harassment complaint against the county sheriff. The county administrator, HR director, and chair of the board of supervisors retained a private law firm to conduct an impartial investigation. After the report was rendered, the board of supervisors gave the sheriff a Formal Notice of Outcome of Investigation. A newspaper requested the investigation report under the California Public Records Act. The county informed the sheriff that it had received the request and intended to release the report. The sheriff's attorney objected to the proposed release on the ground that the investigation report was a personnel document protected from disclosure under the Pitchess statutes, particularly Penal Code section 832.7. The county disagreed. The sheriff brought a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief requesting the court bar the release of the report. The trial court issued a temporary restraining order, then denied the requested preliminary injunction, ruling there was no evidence to show the investigative records should be classified as "personnel records" under section 832.7. The sheriff appealed.
The appellate court agreed with the trial court. The issue is whether Government Code section 6254, subdivision (k) exempted the report from production under the CPRA. Subdivision (k) incorporates other disclosure prohibitions established under law, including the Pitchess statutes protecting officer personnel records. The report was not a personnel record, because the county was not the sheriff's employer. Although the county has chosen to pay its elected officials, under the California constitution the sheriff is a public official elected by the voters, and is ultimately responsible to them, rather than the county board of supervisors or anyone else in county government. The board of supervisors cannot hire, fire, or discipline the sheriff. The county's investigation of the sheriff does not make him the county's employee. The report was the product of an independent outside inquiry. That the county promised the sheriff the investigation would comply with the Peace Officers' Bill of Rights did not estop the county from releasing the report, because POBRA does not contain any provisions exempting documents from production under the CPRA.
Comments