An act to amend Section 7922.535 of the Government Code, relating to public records.
Summary
AB 370 amends the California Public Records Act to expand and clarify when a public agency may extend its response deadlines for a records request under “unusual circumstances.” The bill adds a new category for cyberattacks, allowing an extension when an agency cannot access its electronic servers or systems to search for and retrieve responsive electronic records. That extension applies only while the agency remains unable to access the affected systems, and it does not excuse the agency from responding if the requested records are available in another location or in paper/non-electronic form.
The bill also revises the existing emergency-related extension. For a state of emergency, the bill requires that the emergency not only exist in the agency’s jurisdiction and affect response capacity, but also directly affect the agency’s ability to timely respond because of staffing shortages or facility closures where records are located. The bill excludes requests for records created during and related to the emergency from that emergency-based extension. In addition, AB 370 includes constitutional findings intended to support the act’s consistency with California’s public access provisions and states that no state reimbursement is required for local agencies or school districts.
Impact
AB 370 amends Government Code Section 7922.535, which governs the 10-day initial response period and the 14-day extension for California Public Records Act requests. It broadens the statutory definition of “unusual circumstances” to include cyberattack-related loss of access to electronic records systems and narrows the emergency-based extension by requiring a direct effect on the agency’s ability to respond. The bill affects state and local agencies that process public records requests, especially those relying on electronic records management systems, and it creates a state-mandated local program but declares no reimbursement is required.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It moved through committee and floor votes with unanimous or near-unanimous support, was placed on the consent calendar, and was ultimately chaptered into law. The available voting history suggests lawmakers viewed the measure as a practical update to public records procedures rather than a contested policy change.
Contention
The main policy tension in AB 370 is between timely public access to records and the operational realities agencies face during cyberattacks or emergencies. Support for the bill is reflected in its findings, which emphasize balancing transparency with agencies’ ability to fulfill requests when systems are disrupted. The only notable limitation built into the bill is that the cyberattack extension does not apply to records available outside the affected system, and the emergency extension is narrowed to situations where the emergency directly impairs response capacity. No recorded committee testimony or floor debate is provided, and the vote history shows no recorded opposition.