Wilson

Baker & Hostetler, Glen A. Smith and Dennis F. Hernandez for Real Party in Interest.

OPINION

ARMSTRONG, J.

In a request made pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.), [1] the Los Angeles Times (the Times) sought disclosure of, among other documents, copies of applications submitted to Governor Pete Wilson by persons seeking appointment to the vacancy on the Orange County Board of Supervisors created by the retirement of Supervisor Gaddi Vasquez. When Governor Wilson (through his deputy legal affairs secretary) declined to grant the Times access to the documents, the Times filed a petition for writ of mandate in respondent court. In this proceeding, the Governor challenges respondent court's judgment granting the Times's petition. We hold the applications are exempt from disclosure under the act's "public interest" or "catchall" exemption (§ 6255) because they are subject to the "deliberative process privilege" ( Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1325 [ 283 Cal. Rptr. 893 , 813 P.2d 240 ]) and that the public interest in nondisclosure clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

In the summer of 1995, Orange County…

In a request made pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, §6250 et seq.), 1 the Los Angeles Times (the Times) sought disclosure of, among other documents, copies of applications submitted to Governor Pete Wilson by persons seeking appointment to the vacancy on the Orange County Board of Supervisors created by the retirement of Supervisor Gaddi Vasquez. When Governor Wilson (through his deputy legal affairs secretary) declined to grant the Times access to the documents, the Times filed a petition for writ of mandate in respondent court. In this proceeding, the Governor challenges respondent court’s judgment granting the Times’s petition. We hold the applications are exempt from disclosure under the act’s “public interest” or “catchall” exemption (§ 6255) because they are subject to the “deliberative process privilege” (Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1325 [ 283 Cal.Rptr. 893 , 813 P.2d 240 ]) and that the public interest in nondisclosure clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

Facts and Procedural Background

In the summer of 1995, Orange County Supervisor Gaddi Vasquez announced his retirement from the board of…

I. Introduction

I respectfully dissent from that part of my colleagues’ opinion which resolves the weighing process required by Government Code section 6255 1 without an in camera review of the applications at issue. My colleagues *1145 correctly have engaged in independent review of the respondent court’s decision. (Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1325, 1336 [ 283 Cal.Rptr. 893 , 813 P.2d 240 ]; CBS, Inc. v. Block (1986) 42 Cal.3d 646, 650-651 [ 230 Cal.Rptr. 362 , 725 P.2d 470 ].) I agree with my colleagues that the documents which the Governor reviewed are subject to the deliberative process privilege. (NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (1975) 421 U.S. 132, 150 [ 44 L.Ed.2d 29, 47 , 95 S.Ct. 1504 ]; Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court, supra, 53 Cal.3d at pp. 1339-1343.) In this regard, I respectfully disagree with the legal conclusion of the respondent court. However, once that legal conclusion is made, the remaining step is to determine pursuant to section 6255 whether the public interest served by nondisclosure clearly outweighs the legitimate civic justification for disclosing the documents reviewed by the Governor prior to making the appointment. (53 Cal.3d…