California Public Records Act requests denied
What’s amiss in this California Public Records Act denial from the Sacramento City Attorney?
4 Responses to “California Public Records Act requests denied”
Leave a Reply
Editors
Editors
Recent Posts
- Private Investigator Research Links – Jan 2012
- Sacramento Sheriff Inmate Release Notification
- Genealogy Research and Family History Resources in the San Francisco Bay Area
- Private Investigator Research Links – Dec 2011
- Private Investigator buzz in 2011 – search strategies, public records, database pitfalls
- Social Security Death Index is now restricted
- Private Investigator Research Links – Nov 2011
- Wildcard your county public record searches
- Private Investigator Research Links – Oct 2011
- Private Investigator Research Links – Sept 2011
Recent Comments
- Mike Walker: Hi Tamara, Very considerate of you...
- Takia Woods: I am looking for my father by the...
- americo mercado: lets hope the Sheriffs Office...
- Neil SANKEY: Tamara you are an absolute Gem....
- jodie airey: i am trying to find a friend major...
- Tamara Thompson: All Indiana court case index...
- Patricia Waskom: Web site will not come up. I...
- MISES GONAZLEZ: HELLO IM MOSES GONZALEZ I USED...
- Tamara Thompson: Elementary schools produce...
- Connor: I’m looking for my Kindergaten...
Categories
- Alabama (7)
- Alaska (3)
- Arizona (20)
- Arkansas (7)
- Blogs (3)
- Business (30)
- California (113)
- Canada (5)
- Cell (6)
- Colorado (13)
- Computer tools (5)
- Conferences (2)
- Connecticut (17)
- Criminal (111)
- D.C. (3)
- Data Brokers (18)
- Databases (76)
- Delaware (6)
- Divorce (2)
- Education (5)
- Florida (32)
- FOIA (8)
- Genealogy (16)
- Georgia (6)
- Government (79)
- Hawaii (3)
- Idaho (6)
- Illinois (18)
- Indiana (8)
- Insurance (2)
- International (22)
- Iowa (14)
- Kansas (6)
- Kentucky (6)
- Legal (3)
- Legislation (54)
- Litigation (23)
- Louisiana (6)
- Maine (6)
- Maryland (11)
- Massachusetts (12)
- Media (3)
- Mexico (1)
- Michigan (9)
- Military (3)
- Minnesota (7)
- Mississippi (4)
- Missouri (16)
- Montana (6)
- Nebraska (4)
- Nevada (11)
- New Hampshire (11)
- New Jersey (16)
- New Mexico (8)
- New York (24)
- North Carolina (9)
- North Dakota (7)
- Ohio (17)
- Oklahoma (7)
- Oregon (13)
- Pennsylvania (25)
- Personal Data (52)
- PI Business (15)
- PIs In the News (52)
- Portals & Directories (5)
- Privacy (22)
- Private Investigator (26)
- Probate (4)
- Professional Licenses (7)
- Public Records (345)
- Puerto Rico (1)
- Real Property (26)
- Recorder (15)
- Reference (24)
- Regulation (22)
- Research Methods (30)
- Rhode Island (3)
- Search Engines (3)
- Social Networks (5)
- South Carolina (6)
- South Dakota (8)
- Spy Gear (4)
- States (277)
- Surveillance (5)
- Telco (40)
- Tennessee (10)
- Texas (18)
- Uncategorized (566)
- Utah (7)
- Vermont (6)
- Virginia (10)
- Vital Records (16)
- Washington (16)
- Web tools (39)
- West Virginia (3)
- Wisconsin (15)
- Workers Comp (3)
- Wyoming (2)







Carlsbad, CA was rated number one in Southern CA for providing information according to the local San Diego news agencies. Refreshing to have our local agency thought of so highly. Tied for first place with Coronado, CA I believe, another local agency.
The audit of police departments in California for 2007 has just been released by Californians Aware. The Sacramento PD received a C grade for their responsiveness to Public Records Act requests.
Read the audit and search by agency to see how open each was to requests for information.
The Sacramento City Attorney is taking the low road, not presuming openness. You’re exactly right, they are required to provide name, address and a summary of the incident. The next step would be to quote that portion of the PRA in a follow-up request. I’ll keep everyone posted!
I hope you’ll continue to tell your tales of the ins and outs of dealing with public agencies at your blog.
They didn’t agree to provide the non-protected information. The information such as the location and name of anybody arrested. I have a hard time reading your request but it appears that they did a broad catch-all exception without explanation. The question is, What are you going to do about it?