Public Safety Law Blog

On February 28, 2025, in Santa Ana Police Officers Association, et al, v. City of Santa Ana, the California Court of Appeal’s Fourth District ruled on a challenge by the Santa Ana Police Officers Association (“SAPOA”) and several of its officers who filed anonymously. The Court was asked to review the Superior Court’s dismissal of a lawsuit brought by the SAPOA and the officers alleging that the Santa Ana Police Department (“SAPD”) violated numerous state laws governing confidentiality of peace officer personnel records, investigations of citizen complaints, and labor rights to access information upon request.  The Court of Appeal’s decision rejected most of SAPOA and the officers’ arguments and clarified some of the important duties of law enforcement agencies to protect personnel information of officers and to investigate allegations of misconduct.

On January 31, 2025, the California Public Employment Relations Board (“PERB” or “Board”) held in Trustees of the California State University (Stanislaus) (2025) PERB Dec. No. 2940-H that recognized unions cannot obtain confidential peace officer personnel records through a traditional request for information (“RFI”), but instead only through the Pitchess process.^[1] PERB’s ruling signals a rare limitation on the otherwise-broad right of unions to obtain information from employers pursuant to their statutory representational duties. While the Board has found statutory labor law to apply unconstrained by the parallel provisions in other sources of state law (such as the CPRA), the clear and “unique” Pitchess statutory scheme required the Board to place limits on union’s RFI rights.