BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     SB 175


                                                                    Page  1





          SENATE THIRD READING


          SB  
          175 (Huff and Gaines)


          As Amended  August 17, 2015


          Majority vote


          SENATE VOTE:  36-0


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                   |Noes                 |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Public Safety   |7-0  |Quirk, Melendez,       |                     |
          |                |     |Jones-Sawyer, Lackey,  |                     |
          |                |     |Lopez, Low, Santiago   |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Privacy         |11-0 |Gatto, Wilk, Baker,    |                     |
          |                |     |Calderon, Chang, Chau, |                     |
          |                |     |Cooper, Dababneh,      |                     |
          |                |     |Dahle, Gordon, Low     |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:   Requires each department or agency that employs peace  
          officers and that elects to require those peace officers to wear  
          body-worn cameras to develop a policy relating to the use of  








                                                                     SB 175


                                                                    Page  2





          body-worn cameras.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Provides that the policy shall be developed in accordance with  
            the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, the Ralph C. Dills Act, the  
            Education Employee Relations Act, or the Higher Education  
            Employer-Employee Relations Act, as applicable, with  
            designated representatives of nonsupervisory officers. 


          2)States that the policy shall include, at minimum, all of the  
            following:


             a)   The duration, time, and place that body-worn cameras  
               shall be worn and operational;


             b)   The length of time video collected by officers will be  
               stored by the department or agency;


             c)   The procedures for, and limitations on, public access to  
               recordings taken by body-worn cameras, in accordance with  
               the California Public Records Act;


             d)   The process for accessing and reviewing recorded data,  
               including, but not limited to, the persons authorized to  
               access data and the circumstances in which recorded data  
               may be reviewed; and,


             e)   The training that will be provided on the use of  
               body-worn cameras.


          3)Provides that the policy shall be provided to each officer  
            required to wear a body-worn camera.








                                                                     SB 175


                                                                    Page  3







          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)States that every person who, intentionally and without the  
            consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by  
            means of any electronic amplifying or recording device,  
            eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication,  
            whether the communication is carried on among the parties in  
            the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph,  
            telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished  
            by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or imprisonment in the county  
            jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by  
            both that fine and imprisonment.  


          2)Defines "confidential communication" to include any  
            communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably  
            indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be  
            confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication  
            made in a public gathering or any legislative, judicial,  
            executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or  
            in any circumstance that the parties may reasonably expect  
            that the communication may be overheard or recorded.  


          3)Provides that nothing in the sections prohibiting  
            eavesdropping or wiretapping prohibits specified law  
            enforcement officers or their assistants or deputies acting  
            within the scope of his or her authority, from overhearing or  
            recording any communication that they could lawfully overhear  
            or record.  


          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown.  This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the  
          Legislative Counsel. 










                                                                     SB 175


                                                                    Page  4





          COMMENTS:  According to the author, "As pivotal events  
          surrounding police use of force has become the focus of  
          important national debate, it is necessary to explore law  
          enforcement use of body worn camera (BWC) technology as a  
          statewide concern.  SB 175 addresses the fact that BWC  
          technology is relatively new and some agencies have started  
          using BWC's without providing comprehensive policies for their  
          use.




          "BWC technology will only be as effective as its policies and  
          procedure are.  Having talked with members of numerous law  
          enforcement agencies, a one-size-fits-all approach is  
          unacceptable.  Many agencies have already begun reaching out to  
          community leaders and other agencies to provide policy  
          recommendations regarding privacy rights, data storage, and  
          accountability measures.  It is vital that any legislative  
          framework regarding BWC policies remain flexible so that local  
          agencies can develop policies and procedures that lineup with  
          community needs and agency resources.


          "SB 175 demonstrates an even-handed approach to a serious public  
          safety issue.  While it is clear that law enforcement agencies  
          welcome BWC technology for the good of their departments and the  
          public that they serve, it is obvious that subsequent policies  
          will eventually be developed on the natural.  This particular  
          Senate Bill is an essential forum from which to demonstrate the  
          Legislature's commitment to keeping the discussion focused on  
          the public safety and privacy rights of all citizens, including  
          our peace officers, who are tasked with enormous responsibility  
          to protect and to serve, while preserving the public's trust."


          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Stella Choe / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744  FN:  
          0001325








                                                                     SB 175


                                                                    Page  5