More Sacramento Shenanigans: Pay Up Peasants, If You Want To Know What We're Doing With Your Money

At a time when public trust is already strained, California lawmakers are advancing yet another measure that shields government from scrutiny. Across the state, elected officials are creating laws that make it harder for residents to look into what their own government is doing and AB 1821, amended by Democrat Assemblywoman Blanca Pacheco, is the latest example. Critics say it follows the same pattern as the Nick Shirley law, where citizens face penalties simply for trying to uncover the truth.

Under the newly amended AB 1821, public agencies could charge $22.35 per hour in administrative fees and $66.26 per hour in professional fees for any records request labeled “commercial use.” Agencies could also delay responding by asking a court to rule on whether a requester acted with “malicious intent.” During that time, the agency doesn’t have to release anything.

Supporters, including the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties, argue the changes are needed to stop pranksters or high‑volume AI data scrapers. But transparency advocates warn the bill creates unprecedented barriers for ordinary Californians who simply want to know how their tax dollars are being used.

David Snyder of the First Amendment Coalition said the bill “looks a lot like an effort to evade accountability.” Oakland Privacy’s Tracy Rosenberg called it a “virtual horror show of governmental non‑transparency.” Journalism professor David Cuillier warned it could make California “the most secretive state in the country.”

With fraud, waste, and mismanagement already widespread concerns, many residents are asking a basic question: Don’t taxpayers have the right to know what their paid elected officials are doing?

AB 1821 passed the Assembly before these amendments were added, a common Sacramento tactic, and would make California the first state to explicitly allow agencies to sue residents over “vexatious” records requests. All of the Assembly Democrats, including my opponent Gail Pellerin, voted for it while all opposed were Republicans of course.

Pacheco has defended the changes as “minor tweaks.” Critics say they’re anything but.

At some point, Californians have to decide how many shenanigans it takes before we finally vote out the supermajority that keeps writing laws to protect itself instead of the people.

If this is what a supermajority does when we're watching, imagine what they’ll do once they make it illegal to watch!