§4891.  Privileged communications to code enforcement officers

A.  As used in this Section, the following terms shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

(1)  "Code enforcement officer"  shall mean any employee of a local governmental subdivision or any of its districts, agencies, or departments who is authorized to make inspections, issue violation notices or summonses, or who is otherwise authorized to enforce the ordinances of the local governmental subdivision, including animal control officers.  The term "code enforcement officer" shall not include building or zoning inspectors.

(2)  "Hotline" or "call center" means a method or system created or established to accept any form of communication whether telephonic, electronic, oral, or written for the purposes of providing citizens of the local governmental subdivision a means to report or provide information relating to alleged local code violations except local code violations enforced by building or zoning inspectors.

(3)  "Privileged communication" means an oral or written statement submitted to a code enforcement officer or hotline for the purpose of reporting alleged local code violations.

B.  In connection with any code enforcement case or proceeding, no person shall be required to disclose by way of discovery, testimony, public record request, or otherwise a privileged communication, or be required to produce under subpoena or otherwise any records, documentary evidence, opinions, or decisions relating to such privileged communication.

C.  The privilege shall cease only:

(1)  Upon the person who reported the alleged violation voluntarily disclosing or consenting to disclosure of any significant part of the privileged matter.

(2)  When the person who reported the alleged violation testifies or is compelled to testify on behalf of the local government on the matter.

(3)  Upon motion of any person arrested or charged with a code violation who petitions the court or adjudication hearing officer for an in-camera inspection of the records of a privileged communication concerning such person.  The motion shall allege facts showing that such records would provide evidence favorable to the defendant and relevant to the issue of the adjudication of the code violation.  If the court or adjudication hearing officer determines that the person is entitled to all or any part of such records, it may order production and disclosure as it deems appropriate based upon a finding that it contains exculpatory evidence.

Acts 2010, No. 610, §1, eff. June 25, 2010.