______________________________________ 

 

________________________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
 

State of California
 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN
 

Attorney General
 

OPINION : No. 95-607 

: 

of : September 13, 1996 

: 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN : 

Attorney General : 

: 

MAXINE P. CUTLER : 

Deputy Attorney General : 

: 

THE HONORABLE BILL HOGE, MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE 

ASSEMBLY, has requested an opinion on the following question: 

Are the records of intelligence information and security procedures incorporated into 

the gang reporting, evaluation, and tracking system by law enforcement agencies subject to public 

disclosure under the Public Records Act? 

CONCLUSION 

The records of intelligence information and security procedures incorporated into the 

gang reporting, evaluation, and tracking system by law enforcement agencies are not subject to public 

disclosure under the Public Records Act. 

ANALYSIS 

The gang reporting, evaluation, and tracking ("GREAT") system provides a computer 

database of criminal street gang 1 activity compiled by the Department of Justice and local law 

A "criminal street gang" is defined in Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (f) as "any ongoing organization, 

association, or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, having as one of its primary activities the 

commission of . . . criminal acts . . . , a common name or common identifying symbol, and whose members individually or 

collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity." 

1. 95-607
 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

enforcement agencies. The system allows information concerning gang members to be immediately 

accessed by all law enforcement agencies throughout the state. 

The question presented for resolution is whether the California Public Records Act 

(Gov. Code, '' 6250-6268; "Act")2 requires public disclosure of the records of intelligence information 

and security procedures incorporated into the GREAT system.3 We conclude that such records are 

exempt from disclosure under the Act. 

The Act generally requires a state or local agency to allow members of the public to 

inspect and obtain copies of records in its custody. ('' 6250, 6252, 6253, 6257.) The Legislature has 

declared that "access to information concerning the conduct of the People's business is a fundamental 

and necessary right of every person in this state." (' 6250.) The general policy of the Act favors 

disclosure. "Support for a refusal to disclose information `must be found, if at all, among the specific 

exceptions to the general policy that are enumerated in the Act.'" (Vallejos v. California Highway 

Patrol (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 781, 784.) 

The terms of subdivision (f) of section 6254 requires our analysis to resolve the issues 

presented.4 Subdivision (f) provides in part that nothing in the Act shall be construed to require 

disclosure of: 

"Records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of 

intelligence information or security procedures of, the office of the Attorney General 

and the Department of Justice, and any state or local police agency, or any investigatory 

or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency, or any investigatory 

or security files compiled by any other state or local agency for correctional, law 

enforcement, or licensing purposes. . . ."5 

The GREAT system is a computer database of criminal street gang activity. 

Documents and information incorporated into the GREAT system that comprise records of intelligence 

information fall within the exemption of section 6254, subdivision (f). Such records include 

information that might lead to the identification of persons named in the reports, that might lead to the 

identification of persons who had supplied information in confidence, and information that was 

2 All section references are to the Government Code unless otherwise specified. 

3 We note that an actual request for disclosure of a public record must be limited, focused, and specific. (Rogers v. 

Superior Court (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 469, 480-481.) 

4 The Act's exemptions are permissive, not mandatory; they permit nondisclosure but do not prohibit disclosure. When 

an agency exercises its permissive disclosure authority, public inspection thereafter may not be denied. (Black Panther Party 

v. Kehoe (1974) 42 Cal.App.3d 645, 656.) Of course, disclosure to other law enforcement agencies through the GREAT 

system would not constitute a waiver of any exemption. 

5

An examination of the other exemptions of section 6254 or the "catch-all" provision of section 6255 (see CBS, Inc. v. 

Block (1986) 42 Cal.3d 646, 672; 78 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 103, 106 (1995)) is beyond the scope of this opinion. 

2. 95-607
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

supplied in confidence by its original source. (Williams v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 337, 352; 

ACLU v. Deukmejian (1982) 32 Cal.3d 440, 449-450.) Information is not "confidential" in this context 

unless treated as confidential by its original source. "Thus, information does not become confidential 

because the California Department of Justice and the submitting law enforcement agency agree to treat 

it as such; it is confidential only if the law enforcement agency obtained it in confidence originally." 

(ACLU v. Deukmejian, supra, 32 Cal.3d at 450, fn. 11.) 

Records pertaining to security procedures incorporated into the GREAT system are also 

exempt from disclosure under the terms of section 6254, subdivision (f). Documents or portions of 

documents that deal with security and safety procedures need not be disclosed. (Northern California 

Police Project v. Craig (1979) 90 Cal.App.3d 116, 119-122.) Any information that would 

compromise the security of the GREAT system would be exempt from disclosure, including 

information that would allow or enhance the possibility of unauthorized access to the system. 

Information in manuals and training procedures instructing personnel on access codes and security 

procedures for using the system would be exempt.6 

We conclude that the records of intelligence information and security procedures 

incorporated into the GREAT system by law enforcement agencies are not subject to public disclosure 

under the Public Records Act. 

* * * * * 

Nonexempt information which is not inextricably intertwined with exempt material and is reasonably segregable is 

subject to disclosure. (Northern Cal. Police Project v. Craig, supra, 90 Cal.App.3d at 124.) If segregation of exempt 

information will so reduce the utility of the document that the public interest will not be served by disclosure, it need not be 

segregated and disclosed. (American Civil Liberties Foundation v. Deukmejian, supra, 32 Cal.3d at 444.) The cost and 

burden of segregating exempt from nonexempt material may be considered in making this determination. (Id., at p. 453.) 

3. 95-607
 

6