News & Commentary

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California this week was forced to file a lawsuit against Sacramento County officials after they failed to respond to requests for public documents. It's a case that underscores why it was so important that the state legislature last month backed off plans to weaken the California Public Records Act: the fact is that even with the law intact, it often takes going to great lengths to get access to information that should be readily available to the public.

In a move that threatens the ability of Californians to hold their elected officials accountable to the public interest, the legislature late last week included a sly, last-minute amendment to the 2013-2014 budget now awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown's signature that substantially limits the public's right to know what our local leaders are doing in our name.

Today, we sent a letter to the Alameda County Sheriff asking him whether he plans to pursue his earlier-announced plans to acquire a drone. Budget documents we obtained through a Public Records Act request suggest that he is not planning to acquire a drone in Fiscal Year 2013-14. But a conclusive answer from his office would provide the public with the clarity and transparency it deserves.

If a lengthy jail sentence kept people from becoming addicted, we wouldn't have any drug problems. But California knows from experience that lengthy jail sentences for possession of a small amount of drugs for personal use just makes things worse – wasted lives, overcrowded jails, and devastating budget deficits. Fortunately, California may be about to turn the corner toward commonsense reform.

This week, when the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors rejected an enormously expensive proposal to double the size of the county's jail, it made the county a shining example of local government favoring "smart on crime" policies that enhance public safety and reduce incarceration over the dusty old "tough on crime" platitudes of the past.

Yesterday afternoon the California Court of Appeal held that our prison system has, once again, completely failed to comply with state law when it adopted a problematic procedure for carrying out lethal injection executions.

Tonight, the Redding City Council will consider whether to put the City on the path toward becoming a drone testing site. The ACLU of Northern California has urged the City Council not to approval the proposal at this juncture. (You can read our letter to the City Council here.) The proposal currently before the City Council is nothing more than a blank check. It offers the community no assurances whatsoever that their privacy will not be invaded, and it provides the City Council with no role in overseeing the process of transforming Redding into a drone test site. Drone proponents have emphasized that the integration of drones into domestic airspace is inevitable. While that may be the case, it is therefore all the more essential that Redding, under the leadership of its City Council, take this opportunity to advance not only technology, but also civil rights, privacy, and core values of our constitution. Drones pose significant threats to privacy because they can easily be used for warrantless mass surveillance. Before any community makes the important decision whether to unleash drones into the skies, it should undertake a participatory and informed debate, and it should ensure that meaningful privacy safeguards are in place. At this juncture, essential information about the drone proposal are lacking.

When it comes to drugs, we should focus on the goals we agree on: protecting our kids, protecting public safety and preventing and treating drug abuse and addiction.