Environmental Law
Envt'l Law News Spring 2014, Vol. 23, No. 1
Content
- 2013-2014 Environmental Law Section Executive Committee
- Advancing Producer Responsibility To Control Land-based Sources of Marine Plastic Pollution
- Alternatives to Litigation to Address Climate Change
- Articles from the 2013 Environmental Law Conference at Yosemite Panel "Dire Gyre: Is the Problem of Ocean Plastic Pollution Insoluble?
- As Jurisdictions Like California Sort Out Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing, Nimby Approaches Pop Up in Other Jurisdictions
- Big Things Come In Small Packages: Ninth Circuit Issues Nation's First Decision on Nanotechnology
- California's "Magic" Number: Nine Goals for 2020 and Where We May Go From There
- Editor's Note...
- Environmental Law News Publications Committee
- Introduction: Is the Problem of Ocean Plastic Pollution Insoluble?
- Ocean Plastic
- Table of Contents
- The 2013 Environmental Legislative Recap: a Break in the Perpetual Gridlock
- The Problem of Plastic Debris
- California Supreme Court Decision Expands Public's Right to Access Government-Held Digitally-Formatted Data
California Supreme Court Decision Expands Public’s Right to Access Government-Held Digitally-Formatted Data
by Sabrina Venskus*
INTRODUCTION
The California Supreme Court issued a landmark decision clarifying that the California Public Records Act ("CPRA") allows the public access to government-held electronic data in Sierra Club v. Superior Court (2013) 57 Cal.4th 157 ("Sierra Club"). The issue before the Court was whether Real Party in Interest County of Orange’s land parcel database in an electronic Geographic Information System ("GIS") format must be provided to the public, upon request, pursuant to the CPRA.
The Court reversed the trial court and Court of Appeal, unanimously ruling that a land parcel database in an electronic GIS format is a "public record" and therefore must be provided to a requestor subject to the CPRA’s terms. Thus, Orange County was required to produce its land parcel database upon request at the actual cost of duplication, here the price of a DVD. In its decision, the high court supplemented its usual approach to interpreting a statute by utilizing a rule of statutory construction unique to laws involving government-held information, like the CPRA. That rule, found in the California Constitution, provides that the "people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business . . . .A statute, court rule, or other authority . . . .shall be broadly construed if it furthers the people’s right of access, and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access."1